Chapter 14 Flashcards
Realistic group conflict theory
conflict occurs because groups must compete with one
another for scarce resources.
Discontinuity effect
the markedly greater competitiveness of groups when interacting with other groups, relative to the competitiveness of individuals interacting with other individuals.
Causes of discontinuity effect:
1. Groups are greedier than individuals.
2. Fearing groups more than fearing individuals.
3. Tendency to maximize group’s collective outcomes.
4. Diffusion of responsibility: responsibility is not directly on you, because of the
presence of other group members.
Sidanius & Pratto: social dominance theory
conflict between groups results from
dynamic tensions between hierarchically ranked groups within society.
Insko’s generational studies
groups exploit other groups both economically and
coercively, but coercive influence is associated with greater increases in conflict.
Frustration aggression hypothesis
individuals become more aggressive whenever
external conditions prevent them from reaching their goals.
General aggression model
factors that influence the expression of hostile, negative behavior: (1) Personal and situational inputs (2) Cognitive, affective, and arousal states (3) Cognitive appraisals.
Scapegoat theory
intergroup conflict whereby hostility that is caused by frustrating environmental circumstances is released by taking hostile actions against members
of other social groups.
The interpersonal factors that disrupt relations between groups:
- Realistic group conflict theory
- Discontinuity effect
- Conflict increases when one group attempts to dominate and exploit another group, and the
target group resists exploitation. - Emotional reactions can trigger impulsive intergroup aggression.
- The norm of reciprocity, cultural norms, and group norms can instigate and sustain conflict.
- Evolutionary psychology: natural selection favoured individuals who preferred ingroup
members over outgroup members. > Evolutionary pressures have resulted in the tendency
to respond more negatively to outgroup members who are male rather than female.
Psychological foundations of conflict between groups
- Social categorization causes perceivers to distinguish between ingroup and outgroup
members, even in minimal intergroup situation (= crating temporary groups of anonymous,
unrelated people). - During intergroup conflict, group members’ judgments are often distorted by a number of
cognitive biases - When conflicts become more intense, members may display more extreme reactions to
outgroup - Social identity theory suggest that individuals protect and sustain their identity and self-
esteem by championing the ingroup.
minimal intergroup situation
crating temporary groups of anonymous,
unrelated people
Ingroup-outgroup bias
perceiving own group as better than other groups.
Summer: ethnocentrism
ingroup-outgroup bias in larger groups
Double-standard thinking
judging the actions and attributes of one’s own group
positively, but viewing these very same behaviors negatively when the outgroup
performs them.
Linguistic intergroup bias
tendency to describe positive ingroup and negative
outgroup behaviors more abstractly, and negative ingroup and positive outgroup
behaviors more concretely.
Outgroup homogeneity bias
tendency to assume that the members of other
groups are very similar to each other, whereas membership of one’s own group is
more heterogeneous.
Law of small numbers
basing generalizations about the outgroup on observations
of a small number of individuals from that group.
Group attribution error
mistakenly assuming that specific group members’
personal characteristics and preferences are similar to the preferences of the group
to which they belong to.
ultimate attribution error
attributing negative actions performed by members of
the outgroup to dispositional qualities, and positive actions to situational, fluctuating circumstances.
Stereotype content model
people’s stereotyped views about social groups
reflect their beliefs about the warmth and competence of the stereotyped
group. Elicits four basic emotional reactions in intergroup situation:
- Pity: low competence, high warmth.
- Admiration: high competence, high warmth.
- Envy: high competence, low warmth.
- Contempt: low competence, low warmth.
Moral exclusion
opponents in a conflict come to view each other as undeserving of morally mandated rights and protections.
Dehumanization
believing that other individuals or groups lack the qualities thought to distinguish human being from other animals, causes to rationalize the
extremely negative treatment afforded to members of other groups.
Social identity theory
suggest that individuals protect and sustain their identity and self-esteem by championing the ingroup.
Improvement of intergroup relations:
- Contact hypothesis
- Cognitive approaches to conflict reduction seek to reverse the negative biases that follow
from parsing individuals into ingroups and outgroups. - Kelman: recommends managing conflict by teaching group members the skills they need to
resolve interpersonal disputes.
Contact hypothesis
relations between groups are improved when groups interact together in a positive contact situation.
- Allport: contact is most effective in situations that maintain: (1) equal status, (2)
intergroup cooperation, (3) common goals, and (4) support of authorities, law, or
custom. - Sherif: Robbers Cave experiment: reduced conflict by prompting the boys to work
toward superordinate goals (= goal that can only be attained if two or more
individuals/groups work together by pooling their efforts and resources). - The effectiveness of contact increases if contact is: (1) lengthy in duration, (2) results
in success, and (3) creates opportunities for the development of cross-group
friendships.
> Extended contact hypothesis = cross-group friendships increase the two
friends’ acceptance of the respective outgroups and cause other members of
their groups to become more positive toward the outgroup as well.
> Virtual contact hypothesis = online contact between members of different
groups will improve relations between these groups
Robbers Cave experiment
reduced conflict by prompting the boys to work
toward superordinate goals (= goal that can only be attained if two or more
individuals/groups work together by pooling their efforts and resources)
Extended contact hypothesis
cross-group friendships increase the two
friends’ acceptance of the respective outgroups and cause other members of
their groups to become more positive toward the outgroup as well.
Virtual contact hypothesis
online contact between members of different
groups will improve relations between these groups.
Decategorization
reducing social categorization tendencies by minimizing the notability of group memberships and stressing the individuality of each person in the
group.
Common ingroup identity model
intergroup conflict can be reduced by
emphasizing membership in inclusive social categories (= recategorization) and the
interdependence of the individuals in the groups.
Cross-categorization
reducing social categorization by making their
membership in two or more social groups or categories, that are not related to the categories that are generating ingroup-outgroup bias, very noticeable.
Aronson: jigsaw method
educational intervention that reduces prejudice by
assigning students from different racial or ethnic groups to a single learning group.
