Studies applying the minimal group paradigm to analyze social discrimination processes have been analyzing for the most part the behavior of individuals. The present experiment extends the minimal group paradigm to the group level. The aim of the present study was to compare the decisions made by real groups (N = 3 persons) with those made by single persons. The analysis of the total points given to the in- or the outgroup as well as the strategy MIP + MDI on F revealed that groups are significantly more biased towards the ingroup than individuals. On the other hand, individuals use the strategy F on MIP + MDI significantly more than groups and thus show a greater amount of fairness. These conclusions are qualified by a new method of identifying dominant strategies which shows that the dominant strategy used by individuals and groups is fairness. A theoretical explanation of the results is offered based on social identity theory, the groupthink model and self-awareness theory.