Presentation on theme: "14 Intergroup Relations As a social species, humans strive to establish close ties with one another. Yet the same species that seeks out connections with."— Presentation transcript:
14 Intergroup Relations As a social species, humans strive to establish close ties with one another. Yet the same species that seeks out connections with others also metes out enmity when it confronts members of another group. Intergroup relations are more often contentious than harmonious. What interpersonal factors disrupt relations between groups? What are the psychological foundations of conflict between groups? How can intergroup relations be improved?
I am, in plainer words, a bundle of prejudices— made up of likings and dislikings—the veriest thrall of sympathies, apathies, and antipathies." - Nineteenth century English author Charles Lamb I have no race prejudices, and I think I have no color prejudices nor creed prejudices. Indeed, I know it. I can stand any society.” -- Mark Twain Does membership in one group require rejection of other groups? Who does more harm? Groups or individuals? Is it hopeless? Can conflict only be reduced if all groups are blended together? Intergroup Relations
What Interpersonal Factors Disrupt Relations Between Groups? The Robbers Cave Experiment Conducted by Muzafer and Carolyn Sherif and colleagues in 1950s Two groups of young boys: The Rattlers and the Eagles Causes
Causes Competition and Conflict The Discontinuity Effect Power and Domination Intergroup Aggression Norms of Engagement Evolutionary Perspectives Result: Reactions to conflict escalated from exclusion to verbal abuse to discrimination to violence What caused the conflict between these two groups? Conflict at the Robbers Cave
Competition for Scarce Resources Insufficient Resources Competition for Resources Conflict Realistic Group Conflict Theory Competition Realistic group conflict theory assumes that conflict occurs because groups must compete with one another for scarce resources. Blake and Mouton documented the effects of anticipated competition on conflict.
People in groups are ultra- competitive Insko and his colleagues find groups are more competitive than individuals Greed Identifiability Fear Diffusion of Responsibility The Discontinuity Effect
Maier & Hinsz (2004) “Hot Sauce” Study In a purported taste test study participants (alone or in a group) were told another person or a group had sent them a cup of very, very spicy sauce to consume (48.1 grams). They then were asked to measure out a portion to send to that other individual or group.
Power: Group vs. Group Economic versus militaristic (coercive) exploitation Insko’s study of laboratory microsocieties If certain groups of people stayed in their place, we would have fewer problems. Sometimes other groups must be kept in their place We should do what we can to equalize conditions for groups. We should increase social equality. Social Dominance Theory (Sidanius & Pratto) Power and Domination
Spiral of negative intergroup hostility Intergroup Aggression Aggression Arousal paired with negative thoughts and emotions Aversive situational circumstances (pain, loss of resources, failure) Group A Aggression Aversive situational circumstances (pain, loss of resources, failure) Arousal paired with negative thoughts and emotions Group B The emotional mechanisms described by the frustration aggression hypothesis and the general aggression model can trigger impulsive intergroup aggression.
Scapegoat Processes Intergroup Aggression Aggression Aversive situational circumstances (pain, loss of resources, failure) Arousal paired with negative thoughts and emotions Group A Aggression Arousal paired with negative thoughts and emotions Aversive situational circumstances (pain, loss of resources, failure) Group B Group C
Norm of reciprocity and conflict spirals Cultural norms Chagnon’s studies of the Yanomanö Culture of honor Group norms (gangs, “culture of honor, etc.) Norms of Engagement
Hobbes: “nasty, brutish, and short” Rousseau’s “noble savage” Violent by nature? Human societies tend to be violent, but Fry suggests that peaceful co- existence is a possibility. Cross-culture findings Evolutionary pressures favored individuals who preferred the ingroup to the outgroup Outgroup violence solidified the ingroup Intergroup rejection is stronger for male members of the outgroup Evolutionary Psychology Evolutionary Perspectives
Tajfel and Turner’s “minimal intergroup situation” Groups were nominal, based on some trivial factor (such as art preferences) When asked to distribute resources to others, favored the members of one’s own group They concluded (1986, p. 13): the “mere perception of belonging to two distinct groups—that is, social categorization per se—is sufficient to trigger intergroup discrimination favoring the ingroup” CausesResolutionIntergroup Bias Categorization Ingroup-outgroup bias Cognitive biases Stereotype content model Exclusion & dehumanization Categorization & identity
Favoring the ingroup over the outgroup: Ethnocentrism Ingroup positivity tends to be stronger than outgroup negativity Double-standard thinking (and linguistic intergroup bias) Implicit intergroup biases (IAT findings) Ingroup-outgroup bias IngroupOutgroup
The perceptual tendency to assume that the members of other groups are very similar to each other, whereas the membership of one’s own group is more heterogeneous. Outgroup homogeneity bias Mistakenly assuming that specific group members’ personal characteristics and preferences, including their beliefs, attitudes, and decisions, are similar to the preferences of the group to which they belong. Group attribution error Attributing negative actions performed by members of the outgroup to dispositional qualities and positive actions to situational, fluctuating circumstances. Ultimate attribution error A socially shared set of cognitive generalizations (e.g., beliefs, expectations) about the qualities and characteristics of the members of a particular group or social category. Stereotypes Cognitive Biases
Stereotype content model : outgroup viewed in terms of warmth and competence Emotions: Pity, contempt, envy, admiration Cuddy, Fiske, & Glick, 2007 Stereotype content model
Need for self- esteem Personal Identity InclusionAchievementsSocial Identity Group achievements Group favoritism Increased self-esteem Outgroup rejection Not clear if outgroup rejection raises self-esteem Categorization & identity
Conflict Resolution Intergroup contactCognitive cures Learning to cooperate How can intergroup conflict be minimized? Contact between the groups at the Robbers Cave did not reduce hostilities
Intergroup contact Superordinate goals (worked at Robbers Cave) Successful cooperation A common enemy Online contact: The virtual contact hypothesis Friendships: The extended contact hypothesis Factors that augment the positive impact of intergroup contact Beyond the “basic” ingredients: Empirical findings
Intergroup contact Superordinate goals (worked at Robbers Cave) Successful cooperation A common enemy Friendships: The extended contact hypothesis Factors that augment the positive impact of intergroup contact Beyond the “basic” ingredients: Empirical findings
Pettigrew and Tropp's review High quality contact is best, but any contact better than nothing Contact is more effective in recreational, laboratory, work and educational settings than in residential and tourist settings. Intergroup contact
Decategorization Recategorization : The common ingroup identity model Cross-categorization Controlling stereotyped thinking Cognitive approaches to conflict reduction Cognitive cures
Jigsaw learning groups School-based training in conflict resolution Define the conflict Exchange Information View from multiple perspectives Generate solutions Select mutually advantageous solution Conflict management: interpersonal skill training procedures Learning to cooperate
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness in a descending spiral of destruction....The chain reaction of evil--hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars--must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation. Martin Luther King, Jr.