Realistic Group (Theory) Experiment Conflict And Prejudice

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Social Cognition Molly Marshall. What is social cognition? How we think about other people How we process social information How we explain other peoples.
Advertisements

Psychology of Prejudice and Discrimination Social Context of Prejudice.
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.
Sherif Boys Camp Studies Participants and basic procedure? year old boys Naturally formed groups (e.g., friendships developed) Boys separated into.
Prejudice.
1 Survey Research (Gallup) Would you vote for a qualified Black presidential candidate? Would you vote for a qualified Black presidential candidate? 1958:
Chapter 11: Stereotyping, Prejudice, and Discrimination
Taylor & Sasha. What was the purpose?  Muzafer and his wife, Carolyn, conducted a study on the origin of prejudice.  The experiment focused heavily.
Quick Review of Terms Stereotypes are usually false generalizations: assumption that people of shared religious, ethnic, cultural, or other characteristics.
Chapter 10 Managing Conflict. Conflict The process that results when one person or a group of people perceives that another person or group is frustrating,
Factors contributing to the development of prejudice Factors that may reduce prejudice.
Intergroup Relations: Prejudice and Discrimination
Social Psychology Lecture 12 Inter-group relations Jane Clarbour Room: PS/B007 jc129.
Stereotyping and Prejudice: I Prejudice is a widespread, ubiquitous social problem.
Soc 319: Sociological Approaches to Social Psych Intergroup Conflict April 14, 2009.
Attitudes Chapter 8 Pages
Stereotypes, Prejudice, & Discrimination
Chapter 6: Prejudice and Discrimination. Defining Terminology u Prejudice- negative attitude toward members of some social group u Sexism- prejudice based.
Prejudice Theories and research.
Tajfel & Turner’s intergroup discrimination experiments
Intergroup Conflict. Outline Sources of intergroup conflictSources of intergroup conflict –Competition and conflict –Social categorization Intergroup.
Wade and Tavris © 2005 Prentice Hall 10-1 Invitation To Psychology Carol Wade and Carol Tavris PowerPoint Presentation by H. Lynn Bradman Metropolitan.
Social cognition Explanations of Prejudice. Learning Objectives To understand what psychologists mean by the term prejudice. To know and understand 3.
Lecture Outline Prejudice Theories of Prejudice Measures of Prejudice Explicit v.s. Implicit Prejudice.
No, this is not a guide on how to get a date..  Persuasion  Obedience  Group dynamics  Prejudice  Culture Formation  Stereotyping.
Sherif Robbers Cave Experiment By Anthony Boyle, Jay Williams, Jose Ibarra, and Corey Fillers.
Realistic Conflict Theory Mustafer Sherif Social Psychology.
Intergroup Processes November 11th, 2009 : Lecture 18.
Chapter 7 Prejudice: Foundations, Causes, Effects & Remedies.
Social Psychology Chapter 20 & 21 Review. Group Behavior When the desire to be part of a group prevents a person from seeing other alternatives.
Intergroup Relations Theory and Research: An overview.
Subjective Perception: Attribution theory and Prejudice.
Experiments in inter-group discrimination Henri Tajfel (1970) Tajfel is perhaps best known for his minimal groups experiments. In these studies, test subjects.
+ WARM UP Have you ever been discriminated against? If so, what was the situation?
Prejudice  What is prejudice?  Why are people prejudiced?  Individual view  Intergroup view  Can prejudice be reduced? psychlotron.org.uk.
Notes Prejudice and Discrimination Prejudice: negative attitude held by a person about the members of a particular social group Discrimination: treating.
Overview Victims’ responses to discrimination Victims’ responses to discrimination Ways to reduce prejudice/discrimination Ways to reduce prejudice/discrimination.
Social Psychology II.
STEREOTYPES & PREJUDICE.
Is there prejudice and discrimination between groups?
Fundamentals of Case Management Practice: Skills for the Human Services, Third Edition Chapter Four Applying the Ecological Model: A theoretical Foundation.
Social Influences on Behavior Chapter 14. Effects of Being Observed  SOCIAL FACILITATION: tendency to perform a task better in front of others than when.
Theories of Prejudice 8 June Today’s Lecture Cultural Theories of Prejudice Realistic Conflict Theory (Sherif) Social Identity Theory –Minimal Groups.
Prejudice. An unjustifiable attitude toward a group and its members Based on the exaggerated notion that members of other social groups are very different.
©2002 Prentice Hall Behavior in Social and Cultural Context.
Chapter 18 Social Psychology. The scientific study of how we think about, influence, and relate to one another. social psychology.
Socio-Cultural LOA Social Identity Theory. What Type of Doodler are you? Psychological research has identified two types of doodler, Concrete Abstract.
Stereotypes and Prejudice Chapter 5. Stereotypes and Prejudice Chapter 5.
Prejudice formation in children Dr Louisa Jones Birmingham Educational Psychology Service.
INTERGROUP RELATIONS Social psychologists study in-groups vs. out-groups, ethnocentrism, and the difference between prejudice and discrimination.
Social Thinking: Attitudes & Prejudice. What is an attitude? Predisposition to evaluate some people, groups, or issues in a particular way Can be negative.
Overview Roles and rules Social influences on beliefs Individuals in groups Us vs. Them: Group identity Group conflict and prejudice.
Prejudice & Discrimination Heuristics to Hate. Social CategoriesStereotypesPrejudice Discrimination Prejudice & Discrimination COGNITIVEAFFECTIVEBEHAVIORAL.
Sherif et al. (1961) The Robbers’ Cave Study By Maddy and Michelle.
Cross-Cultural Psychology
Psychological factors in leading sports activities
1. What is the common theme?
Lecture Outline Stereotyping Self-fulfilling prophecies Prejudice
Cross-Cultural Psychology
Chapter 11: Stereotyping, Prejudice, and Discrimination
Chapter 11: Stereotyping, Prejudice, and Discrimination
Explanations of Prejudice
The Public Policy Process
Chapter 14: Understanding Social Behavior
Chapter 6: Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination
IClicker Questions for Psychology, Seventh Edition by Peter Gray Chapter 14: Social Influences on Behavior.
Groups Definition Two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who come together to achieve particular objectives.
Presentation transcript:

Realistic Group (Theory) Experiment Conflict And Prejudice

Limited resources it leads to conflict, prejudice and discrimination between groups who seek that common resource. Once hostility has been aroused, it is very difficult to return to normal relations and an ongoing feud can arise.

Negative attitudes and prejudice arise when groups compete for scarce resources and their interests are incompatible (e.g., one group gains and the other group loses). However, tolerance and fairness prevail in situations in which group interests are compatible and complementary (e.g., one group gains only with the assistance of another group).

Realistic Conflict Theory (Sherif): Groups become prejudiced toward one another because they are in competition for material resources and/or political power.

Robber's Cave Experiment (Sherif & Sherif, 1954) Robbers Cave State Park in Oklahoma Participants: 20 boys, 11-12 years old None knew each other prior to study Three phases, 1 week each

Muzafer and Carolyn Sherif (1954) studied the origin of prejudice in social groups in a classic study called the Robbers Cave Experiment. The field research was conducted in a 200 acre (0.8 km²)summer camp which was completely surrounded by Robbers Cave State Park

Procedure Named a camp janitor. Screened a group of 22 twelve year-old boys with similar backgrounds. Participants were 11-12 years old boys. They were picked up by two buses carrying 11 boys each. Neither group knew of the other's existence. The boys were assigned to two living areas far enough apart that each group remained ignorant of the other's presence for the first few days. The Sherifs had broken up pre-existing friendships to the extent they could, so that each boy's identification with his new group could happen faster. Asked to choose names for their groups, one chose "The Rattlers", the other "The Eagles." Within two or three days, the two groups spontaneously developed internal social hierarchies.

PHASES OF EXPERIMENT In-group formation, A Friction Phase, which included first contact between groups, sports competitions, etc. An Integration Phase (reducing friction).

Phase I (week 1) IN-GROUP BUILDING PHASE At first groups were separated, no knowledge of each other. Normal camp activities Ingroup identity creation: each group developed norms, leaders emerged, the Rattlers and Eagles

Phase II (week 2) FRICTION BETWEEN TWO GROUPS Groups aware of one another. At first no conflict Competition introduced. Prizes: pocket knife, medal, cash Effect of competition-*Intergroup conflict Name calling pig, cheater Saw own group positively We're brave And outgroup negatively They are sneaky, stinkers Seizing and burning other team's flag Cabin raids, stealing jeans. Losing team stole the prizes Held noses while passing members of other camp Caught hiding rocks in their socks. Increase in preference for in-group members, negativity within group declined. Inter-group hostility and in-group solidarity

Phase III (week 3) INTEGRATION OF TWO GROUPS Reversing the hostility was ore difficult than creating it. Non-competitive contact failed to reduce conflict rather opportunities were searched to fight each other Friction between two groups lessened through the task – cooperation between the groups Superordinate goal introduction: mututwally shared goal only achieved through intergroup cooperation. Water supply broke. Camp truck broke down. Groups came together to fix them. Effects of superordinate goal: Negative stereotypes declined. Increase in outgroup friendships. Groups decided to put on entertainment program together. Groups insisted on riding home together on same bus. Rattlers used prize money to buy malts for everyone.

INTERGROUP OR MAJORITY VS MINORITY CONFLICT

Group formation Intra group relation develops Real or perceived conflicting goal…that can be achieved only at expense of other group Generate intergroup competition Engage in reciprocally competitive/frustrating acts Selective misperception of other group Intergroup hostility emerge automatically Develop negative stereotype by each group Enmity towards other group

Studies also show competition promotes aggression (Bonta, 1997). Before conflict of interest, negative reactions to out group was also noticed…indicating mere presence of out group sufficient to trigger intergroup discrimination (Biliig, 1976)

Sherif's works (see, for instance, 1953) have also emphasized the need for a society to achieve cohesion, and the tendency of majority groups to see minorities as an anomaly, or an obstacle to bring about that cohesion.

In some situations, in some cases, certain individuals' desire to become members of the dominant group is met with resistance. Both situations lead to majority- minority conflict. There is also (Sherif, 1953) frequent incongruence between one's 'reference group' and 'membership group (Sherif, 1953):'  

A reference group is a group to which the individual relates him/herself as a member, or to which s/he aspires to relate him/herself psychologically. A membership group, on the other hand, is a group of which the individual is (in actuality) willingly or unwillingly a member. Quite frequently, some people's reference group happens to be different from their membership group.

IF REFERENCE GROUP IS DIFFERENT: They are considered troublemakers by the latter, for they behave according to the norms of the former (Reference group). The loyalty of such individuals lies with their reference group, and, hence, they are distrusted by their membership group .  

This incongruence can be observed in almost every conflict between a majority and an ethnocultural minority.

Tajfel (1981) and Billig (1976) have successfully argued that just the existence of a majority versus a minority (or even the existence of two groups irrespective of their relative sizes) is enough for the formation of prejudices and in-group biases.

Furthermore, some experimental studies concluded that even when two groups enjoy friendly or cooperative relations, they might still seek ways to derogate each other by making judgments favoring the in-group (Druckman, 1994).