In many societies and cultures, the idiom black sheep is used to describe someone who is different from the rest of the group, especially a family member who doesn't fit in. The origin of this word can be traced back to the occasional black sheep in a flock, which stood out from the crowd because of their fur color, which contrasted with the white color of the majority of the sheep. Because black sheep’s wool cannot be dyed and has a lower market value than their white counterparts, they are often shunned. In psychology, this phenomenon is called the "black sheep effect," which refers to the phenomenon in which group members tend to evaluate favorite members of their in-group more positively and are more harsh on members who deviate from the norm.
The concept of black sheep demonstrates how social identity shapes the relationship between individuals and groups, and how people's evaluations of ingroup members can vary greatly depending on their sense of belonging.
In the vast majority of sheep, white wool is produced by a dominant gene, while black wool is caused by a recessive gene. This means that even if a sheep appears white, it may still produce black lambs if its genetic makeup includes the black gene. This relatively rare trait makes black sheep highly noticeable and ostracized among the usual flock of sheep.
In 18th and 19th century Britain, black sheep were seen as a symbol of the devil, and this negative connotation influenced subsequent language usage. In modern times, the idiom has lost some of its derogatory meaning, but is still used to describe members of a group who are considered to have unsociable characteristics. For example, Jessica Mitford calls herself the "red sheep of the family" because most members of her family hold extreme political views, but she has chosen a relatively radical stance. Examples like these reflect that in any society or family, members of minority groups are often judged more harshly.
The concept of black sheep is ubiquitous in different languages, indicating the universality of this social phenomenon and its derivative meanings.
The emergence of the black sheep effect can be explained by social identity theory. This theory holds that group members, often out of a need to maintain their own social identity, will highly support favorite members of the group and will evaluate members who deviate from the norm more harshly. This is because group members want to maintain a positive image of their group and thus gain more positive recognition in society.
For example, in a 1988 experiment, participants compared unpopular Belgian students with popular Belgian students. The results showed that popular members received the highest praise in both in-group and out-group groups, while unpopular in-group members received the worst evaluations. The popular and unpopular members of the out-group are somewhere in between.
The impact of social identity on behaviorThis phenomenon reveals group members' bias toward internal groups and relative tolerance toward external groups.
When individuals feel a clear sense of belonging within a group, they will be more critical of black sheep. This criterion does not rely solely on group membership but also includes group cohesion and the influence of specific situations. For example, in a competitive environment, internal members who deviate from the norm tend to receive more intense criticism.
However, it is worth noting that the black sheep effect does not occur in all cases. As social research deepens, scholars have discovered that some external factors can affect the occurrence of this phenomenon, such as the degree of identification of group members and the cohesion of the group. These factors explore how group biases vary across cultures and social contexts, reflecting the complexity of human societies.
In the process of seeking social recognition, how to view and treat members who are different from oneself directly affects the harmony and stability within the group.
From the story of the black sheep, can we understand whether being different is really a sin, or whether we should be more accepting of diversity?