Intergroup Relations

INTERGROUP CONFLICT
OUTLINE
Sources of intergroup conflict

Competition and conflict
Social categorization
Intergroup conflict resolution
Contact
Beyond contact
Cognitive cures
ROBBERS CAVE EXPERIMENT (SHERIFS, 1961)
A field study attempting to better understand
the causes and consequences of intergroup
conflict.
Subjects:
Normal boys of the same age, educational
level, similar sociocultural backgrounds
Group formation:
Arrived in 2 separate groups (Rattlers and
the Eagles). Remained apart for one week.
Ingroup/outgroup rivalry:
Occurred spontaneously when each
group realized the other boys were
there. It was spurred by the Sherifs who
set up competitive tournament.
Tournament conflict escalation:
Rejection, verbal insults, name calling and
physical violence
COMPETITION AND CONFLICT:
US VERSUS THEM
1) Competition between groups for resources
Realistic conflict theory:

Intergroup conflict is caused by competition
among groups over limited resources.
Competition implicated in class struggles,

international warfare, racism...
COMPETITION AND CONFLICT
2. Reciprocity of contentious strategies
Groups also follow the norm of reciprocity
Hatfield/McCoy dispute
A spiral model of conflict intensification
accurately describes Robbers cave:
Verbal abuse
Avoidance
Discrimination
Physical assault
COMPETITION AND CONFLICT
3. Scapegoating
Hostility caused by frustrating circumstances
are sometimes taken out on innocent members
of other social groups
Explains rise in prejudice when the economy
takes a downturn
Study showing a significant negative
correlation between the number of black men
lynched in the US and the price of cotton.
(Hovland and Sears, 1940)
SOCIAL CATEGORIZATION:
PERCEIVING US AND THEM
1) Ingroup/outgroup bias:
We favor our own group and derogate
the outgroup
At Robbers Cave, when asked to name
their friends Eagles picked Eagles,
Rattlers picked Rattlers
Boys used negative characteristics to
describe the outgroup, but rated their
own group more favorably
SOCIAL CATEGORIZATION
Cognitive consequences of categorization
A. Outgroup homogeneity effect:
Assuming outgroup members are all the same
B. Ingroup differentiation bias:

We assume our group is complex and diverse
C. Extremity bias:

We make more extreme judgments about people in
other groups
D. Law of small numbers:
We base judgments about another group based on
observations of a small number of individuals
E. Group attribution error:

We base judgments about individuals on the general
characteristics of the whole group
F. Stereotypes:
We rely on cognitive generalizations about qualities
and characteristics of members of a particular group
Does categorization cause conflict?

Minimal group paradigm
A research procedure used to study
intergroup conflict that creates temporary
groupings of anonymous people whose
interdependence is virtually nil
Even in minimal groups there is evidence
of bias!
SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY (SIT)
Three basic assumptions of SIT:
People categorize the social world into ingroups and
outgroups
People strive for a positive self-concept; they derive a
sense of self-esteem from their social identity
People’s self-concept partly depends on their
evaluation of their group relative to others.
Thus, Social Identity Theory suggests:
We ridicule members of other groups to raise the value
of our own group; thus, raising the value of our self.
INTERGROUP CONFLICT RESOLUTION
Peaceful co-existence through benign

contact
Contact hypothesis:
Frequent contact between groups reduces
conflict between those groups
The Sherifs brought the boys together
Watching films, lighting fireworks, eating
This failed!
Contact during meals lead to food fights!
Beyond contact
Superordinate goals hypothesis:
Situations that encourage groups to work
together to achieve a common goal can
reduce conflict between these groups.
Sherifs created a series of emergencies
that could only be handled by the groups
working together
After 6 days of this cooperation the
tensions were fairly well wiped out!
SUPERORDINATE GOALS
HAPPY ENDING!
CONFLICT REDUCING CONTACT SITUATIONS
Necessary ingredients:
1) Cooperation:
Work together for common goals
2) Status
Equal status!
3) Personal interaction
Involving, positive interactions; not
superficial
4) Norms
Encouraging egalitarian attitudes
5) Positive outcomes:
Cognitive cures for conflict
Decategorization
Minimizing the salience of group
memberships and stressing the
individuality of each person
Recategorization
Collapsing groups in conflict into a single
group or category
Controlled stereotyped thinking (Devine)
Stereotypes are automatically activated-
but we can control our subsequent
thoughts
CLASS ACTIVITY

Intergroup Relations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Intergroup Relations

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Intergroup Relations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTERGROUP CONFLICT

Sources of intergroup conflict

Realistic conflict theory:

Competition implicated in class struggles,

B. Ingroup differentiation bias:

C. Extremity bias:

E. Group attribution error:

Does categorization cause conflict?

Peaceful co-existence through benign

You might also like