Exam #3 Flashcards
Intragroup Conflict?
Disagreement or confrontation between members of the same group.
Bales & Hares, (1965)
Novel groups working on a task spent as much as 20% of their time making hostile or negative comments.
French, (1941)
Groups working on a frustrating and impossible-to-solve task, high intensity conflict overtook most groups.
(Competition & Cooperation)
Deutsch (1949a)
Created two grading systems in his college classes
Competitive?
Relative grading system in which individuals are ranked in order of performance, and some individuals must fail.
Cooperative?
Individuals worked in groups to learn the material and everyone in the group received the same grade.
(Mixed-Motive Conflict)
Prisoner’s Dilemma?
-Two prisoners are accused of a crime.
-The police believe the two worked together but only have enough evidence to convict each of a minor offense.
-The police offer a reduced sentence to whoever confesses first.
What’s The Dilemma?
The interests of the individual conflict with the interests for the group.
The best decision for the individual, regardless of what their partner does, is to defect:
If B defects, then A should defect too so they get 8 years instead of 20.
If B cooperates, then A should defect so they get no time, instead of 6 months.
However, the group outcome is better if both cooperate (6 months each) than if they both defect (8 years).
Social Values Orientation?
The dispositional tendency to respond to conflict settings in a particular way.
Competitor?
Strives to maximize own outcomes and minimize others’ outcomes; views disagreements as win—lose situations.
*The most important thing for them is to win, that is, to perform better than everyone else.
Cooperator?
Strives to maximize joint outcomes; seeks win—win solutions to disagreements.
-Others cooperation is positively related to their own cooperativeness
*They want to do well themselves, but they also want others to do well.
Individualist?
Strives to maximize own outcomes only; seek only to achieve their own goals.
-Others cooperation is not associated with their own cooperativeness
*These individuals simply do not consider the outcomes of others, they focus purely on maximizing their own rewards.
Conflict Over Resources?
Individuals extract needed resources from their groups, but too much selfishness can lead to conflict.
Edney (1979)
Pool of resources available to group of players. Each can take as many coins as they wish
Resources are doubled every 10s
65% of groups never got to the first replenishment!
Public Goods Dilemmas?
A social dilemma where individuals can choose not to contribute any resources to support a public good, but still enjoy the benefits of the good.
(EX): Most people use Wikipedia on a semi-regular basis, but very few people donate to help sustain the public good it provides
*So you’re taking the resource but not giving back to sustain it.
Equity Norm?
Individuals should receive goods based on their contributions, those who contribute more, get more.
(EX): A roommate that pays the most amount of rent should be getting the bigger room.
Equality Norm?
All group members, irrespective of their input, should be given an equal share of the good.
(EX): Healthcare.
Power Norm?
Those with the most power/status should be given the most.
(EX): For example, the leader of a work-group may get the best office with the best view, and the best computer.
Need Norm?
Resources should be allocated to those with the greatest need first
(EX): People with the most severe condition in the ER are usually seen first.
Sociocentric?
Group-serving (sociocentric): The entire group is praised for success. External forces are blamed for failures.
Egocentric?
Self-serving (egocentric): Individuals take undue personal credit for success and blame one another for the group’s misfortunes.
Substantive Conflict?
Disagreements over issues that are relevant to the group’s recognized goals.
-Good to the extent that results in increased creativity and problem solving
Procedural Conflict?
Disagreement over the methods the group should use to complete its basic tasks
(EX): The professor will say “We are getting a 20 minute break”. without having the class vote.
Conflict over Liking
Morrill’s (1995) study of corporate executives?
Found 40% of disputes were rooted in the dislike of one another.
Disputants complained about others’:
-Moral values
-Treatment of their spouses
-Politics
-Dress at work and social gatherings
-Hobbies and recreational activities
-Personality traits
Which of the following factors are NOT characterized as a determinant of the Prisoner’s Dilemma strategy?
Age
Individual family members using up more data than they originally agreed on is an example of which type of dilemma?
Commons dilemma
This social values orientation involves maximizing your own outcomes and minimizing others’ outcomes, as well as viewing disagreements as “win-lose situations.”
Competitor
One of three roommates living at a rental hom1e pays more rent than the other two; thus, the two roommates let that roommate keep the biggest room in the home. This is an example of which fairness dilemma norm?
Equity norm
Using Wikipedia often but not donating any money to it when the website requests it from its users is an example of the __ dilemma.
Public goods dilemma
Conflict Over Resources?
We can think of the prisoner’s dilemma as a conflict over resources, since it is typically framed as competition and cooperation for monetary incentives.
Commons dilemmas?
Another class of social dilemmas where conflict occurs over resources, are called “commons dilemmas”. The name comes from the economic theory describing the “tragedy of the commons.” The commons is a public and unregulated resource. For example, the commons is often thought of as a public field that all the local farmers are permitted to use so that their sheep can graze. In order to keep the resource plentiful, it is important that it not be over-grazed. So each farmer needs to limit their use of the commons.
Responsibility Dilemma’s?
(EX): A group of students who completed a school project and earned an A. One member of the group did little to contribute to that project and when the teacher asks “how did you come up with such a creative project?”, that one member abruptly responds, “it was my idea” - that member is taking more credit (responsibility) than he/she should really take.
Forsyth, Berger, & Mitchell (1981)?
-Whether the group succeeds or fails.
-The responsibility taken by other members: low, moderate, or high
DV: how much the participant likes the other members.
Conflict Escalation?
Individuals may start a group discussion unsure of their position, but over time their certainty increases, and can cause conflict to escalate.
-Confirmation bias
-Motivation to appear consistent
-Desire to “win” the discussion
-Cognitive dissonance
(EX): “I should be a good eater”.
but I can eat fast food because I run all the time.
Mikolic, Parker, & Pruitt (1997)?
Paid participants to make birthday cards using paper, colored markers, and ribbons. Participants efforts were frustrated by a confederate who deliberately hoarded materials
The Trucking Game
Deutsch & Krauss, 1960?
Participants given $4.00 and asked to imagine themselves as the owner of one of two trucking companies (Acme or Bolt) that carried merchandise.
Each time their truck reaches the destination on the opposite side of the board, they earn 60 cents, minus operating costs (1 cent for each second taken by the trip).
The Trucking Game
Deutsch & Krauss, 1960?
Participants given $4.00 and asked to imagine themselves as the owner of one of two trucking companies (Acme or Bolt) that carried merchandise.
Each time their truck reaches the destination on the opposite side of the board, they earn 60 cents, minus operating costs (1 cent for each second taken by the trip).
The Trucking Game?
*Three conditions
1.) The unilateral-threat condition: Only ACME has gate access to main road.
2.) The bilateral-threat condition: both sides have gate access
3.) Control condition: No gates
Other Sources of Escalation?
Rough reciprocity – reciprocate attacks with more intense counterattacks.
Coalition building. (ex): Multiple members team-up against certain others.
“us vs. them” mentality “to win” lose sight of real goal/objective.
Negative emotions replace logical discussion.
(Anger, anxiety, frustration)
Negotiation?
A reciprocal communication process whereby two or more parties to a dispute examine specific issues, explain their positions, and exchange offers and counter-offers to reach agreement or achieve mutually beneficial outcomes
Two WAYS to approach Negotiation?
*Distributive Negotiations: Both parties retain a competitive orientation and take turns making small concessions until some equally dissatisfying middle ground is reached.
(EX):
-Basic: each party tries be “the winner”
-Middle ground often doesn’t solve problem or help anyone
-Middle ground = equally dissatisfying bc both won’t think they “lost”
*Integrative Negotiations: Individuals work to achieve cooperative outcomes that benefit both sides
= more difficult because easy to become competitive.
Important: see opponent as “cooperative partner” not competitor.
This strategy reduces mutual dissatisfaction & worse outcomes.
A difficult problem…
There was a wealthy man who had 3 sons.
In his will, he determined that…
-His oldest son should get 1/2 of his estate
-His second born son should inherit 1/3 of his estate
-His youngest son should inherit 1/9 of his estate
-His estate was 17 camels…
-His oldest son should get 1/2 of his estate = 8.5 camels
-His second born son should inherit 1/3 of his estate = 5.67 camels
-His youngest son should inherit 1/9 of his estate = 1.89 camels
Carrying out their father’s wishes, will require killing some of the camels??
An Integrative Solution…
The men consult a wise philosopher…
“Before solving your problem, let me give you a gift. I am impressed by your eagerness to honor the will of your father, so I will give you one more camel out of my own possession.”
-His oldest son should get 1/2 of his estate = 9 camels
-His second born son should inherit 1/3 of his estate = 6 camels
-His youngest son should inherit 1/9 of his estate = 2 camels
Now the camels can be easily divided amongst the brothers, and there is one left over to return to the philosopher!
The Tit-for-Tat Strategy?
A method of responding in a social dilemma in which the party begins with a cooperative response and then matches his or her responses to those that are given by the other party.
*Prevent conflict strategy = T4T strategy.
*Can use in social dilemma games where choices = cooperate/compete
= begin w ‘cooperate’, then do whatever your partner does for rest of game.
The tit-for-tat strategy is effective because:
-It is NICE: The individual first signals a willingness to cooperate.
-It is CLEAR: Easy to understand how the choices are being determined.
-It is PROVOCABLE: The approach sends a clear message that competitive choices on the part of the other will not be tolerated.
-It is FORGIVING: Cooperation is always reciprocated.
Culture?
Often define culture to specific groups.
American, Asian, southern cultures = people exist within shared context.
*Culture can refer to any kind of information that is acquired from members of one’s species through social learning that is capable of affecting an individual’s behaviors.
Comparing Southern to Northern students, Cohen et al. (1996) found that Southern students were more ______ and had ______, after being verbally insulted by the confederate.
Angry than amused; higher levels cortisol and testosterone
Diener et al. (2009) studied the difference in subjective well-being between individualistic and collectivistic concluded that subjective well-being (i.e., happiness) was positively associated with ___.
Individualism
Individuals from __ cultures are more likely to engage in self-serving biases.
Individualistic
___ cultures are more likely to make situational attributions to an individual’s behavior, whereas ___ cultures are more likely to make personal attributions to an individual’s behavior.
Interdependent; independent
Which of the following explanations was discussed as being the origin for the difference in
between American Northerners and American Southerners?
Southern herders were most likely to develop and protect their “tough” (i.e., aggressive) reputation to protect livestock.
Cultural Groups?
Compared to a “Working Group”
Independent Cultures (Western) United States, Canada, Europe, Australia
Characterized by Individualism
The tendency to value the personal self and to see the self as separate from other people.
Interdependent Cultures (East Asian) China, Japan, Taiwan, Korea, India
Characterized by Collectivism
The tendency to focus on developing harmonious social relationships with others, with particular importance placed upon the awareness of one’s social roles.
Independent?
“The squeaky wheel gets the grease”
= “If you want something, go for it”.
- Independent cultures = more flexible structure
Interdependent?
“The nail that stands out gets pounded down” = “Punishment for putting self in front of group”
- Interdependent have tighter structure with strong sense of duty/responsibility to family/relationships.
Kim & Markus (1999)?
Kim & Markus illustrated difference between 2 cultures on standing out/being unique.
Approached random strangers at a San Francisco airport.
Diener et al., 2009?
Individualistic societies afford an individual more freedom to choose his or her own life course.
Successful people in individualistic societies may be more likely to attribute success to themselves.
Lee & Seligman (1997)?
Compared American students with mainland Chinese students
Self-serving biases?
White Americans engaged in more self-serving biases – attributing their successes to themselves, and their failures to external circumstances.
*Successful because hard work; failed because task = unfair, too difficult.
Situational attributions ?
The mainland Chinese students engaged in more situational attributions – they were more likely to attribute their success and failures to other people or circumstances.
*Successful because of luck, good teacher, easy test; failed because poor teacher, bad luck.
Levine & Norenzeyan (1999)?
Conducted a series of field experiments measuring walking speed, work speed, and concern with clock time in countries around the world.
Balancing the Two Orientations?
The cultural split of independence and interdependence is not black and white.
Individuals in Western cultures frequently join groups and develop strong identities with those groups.
Individuals in East Asian cultures have well-developed self-concepts that are sensitive to the opinions of others.
Culture of Honor?
The Southern US has long been regarded as more violent than the North.
-Hotter temperatures
-Greater poverty
-Culture of Honor
*Prototypical example of Culture of Honor = southern USA
Origins of the Culture of Honor?
-Southern herding economies, in the absence of a central government to enforce laws, were susceptible to livestock theft.
-Individuals had to be prepared to protect their property, using violence if necessary.
-It would be important to cultivate a reputation for manly toughness to discourage individuals from considering cattle raiding.
Origins of the Culture of Honor?
-Southern herding economies, in the absence of a central government to enforce laws, were susceptible to livestock theft.
-Individuals had to be prepared to protect their property, using violence if necessary.
-It would be important to cultivate a reputation for manly toughness to discourage individuals from considering cattle raiding.
Cohen et al. (1996)?
Participants were male students at the University of Michigan who were either from the South or Northern US (none were from Michigan).
Examined whether cultural differences would predict reactions to a staged insult.
Culture (Joseph Henrich)?
Argues that culture (as a process of learning information relevant to our local environment) is what has made the human species so successful.
*Means: Learn culture from parents/family/friends human success as species.
Human’s Ecological Success?
Henrich’s “success” = humans dispersed from origin (Africa) to environments across 6 continents.
Despite array ecological diversity (cold/hot, humid/dry dessert, ocean/mountains, etc.) human prevailed
Human’s Ecological Success?
Henrich’s “success” = humans dispersed from origin (Africa) to environments across 6 continents.
Despite array ecological diversity (cold/hot, humid/dry dessert, ocean/mountains, etc.) human prevailed
Humans vs Ants?
Humans are not the only animals to have world-wide success…
…But ants have achieved their success through genetic adaptations and speciation.
*Means: After ants migrate to new ecology/environment that not well adapted to natural selection (NS) makes new genetic adaptations for new ecology [over years]
Ants become so genetically different–> = new species.
Burke & Wills Expedition 1860-1861?
Led a 19 man exploration of Australia, which had not been colonized yet. Only aboriginal hunter gatherers populated the continent.
Burke & Wills Expedition?
The group lacked skills to hunt/fish or find fresh water.
The aboriginals provided them with gifts of fish and showed them to water.
Burke & Wills tried to make “nardoo cakes” from plants after observing the local women make them.
They failed to prepare it properly, and poisoned themselves. Only 1 survived
Burke & Wills Expedition?
The expedition of men failed to survive in the environments in which humans evolved.
No special survival mechanisms kicked in.
No general learning mechanisms saved them
Yet the skills they needed were easily performed by the local adolescents!
They were missing the cultural “download” of information for that ecology
Social Learning not General Intelligence
Herrmann et al. (2007)?
Tested the hypothesis that what separates humans from other primates is not our general intelligence, but our social intelligence. Essentially, our ability to learn from others.
Humans’ success not due to GENERAL intelligence due to SOCIAL intelligence = ability learn from others.
Greatness/power of human social intelligence = unique to us/humans.
*–> Explains why humans = all over world but still = same species.
*Physical: Problems solved with General Intelligence.
*Social: Problems solved with Social Learning.
Herrmann et al. (2007)?
Orangutans = Apes.
3 groups = Humans, Chimps, & Orangutans
* All humans = 2.5 years old [to be comparable to chimps & orangutans].
Genetic Adaptations for Acquiring Culture
Humans track cues of success from the best “models”?
Skill/Competence: We watch those who are successful hunters.
Prestige: We watch people who are watched by others
Age: We watch those who are slightly older than us. Those who survive have been successful.
Sex: We watch those who are similar to us, their behavior is more useful.
Language/Dialect: We watch those who speak our language, they are from the same “group” and face the same challenges.
Allows for Cumulative Knowledge?
Tools are hard to invent.
The wheel was invented 6,000 years ago, and only in Eurasia.
Once something it has been invented, it can be passed on to others and innovated upon.
Cultural Adaptations?
Socially transmitted solution to an adaptive challenge in the local ecology.
Cultures in tropical climates (where
s are prevalent) use spices in their meat dishes.
The spices are effective in killing pathogens in the meat.
Knowledge is stumbled upon and passed on. Eventually, the knowledge of the function is likely to be lost, but the tradition maintained.
Genetic Adaptations as a result of Cultural Adaptations?
Humans have cultural adaptations for cooking food that allow us to gain more nutrition from the food with less effort and less risk of parasite transmission.
Given this cultural adaptation, humans did not need as large/sharp teeth as similar non-human primates of our size.
A New Perspective on Cultural Groups?
Differences in Individualism versus Collectivism could be due to genetic and/or cultural adaptations to local ecology.
Behavioral Immune System?
Our physiological immune system is mobilized once we are exposed to pathogens, but we also have a behavioral immune system to help prevent us from contracting a disease.
Behavioral Immune System: System of mechanisms designed to detect the presence of pathogens in the immediate environment and facilitate the avoidance of those pathogens before they make contact with the body.
Signal Detection?
The Behavioral Immune System may respond to any cue of potential disease, such as noxious odors, swelling, and disfiguring blemishes.
The presence of such cues should promote avoidant behavior to prevent contamination.
System should err on the side of caution, like a smoke detector.
System should also be sensitive to individual differences in susceptibility to disease.
Mortensen et al. (2010)?
Participants were either shown pictures/information about architecture (control condition) or germs and transmission of contagious disease (disease prime condition).
Then they completed a personality inventory (A, E, O) and a measure of their perceived vulnerability to disease (PVD)
Pathogen Prevalence and Culture?
Social Categorization?
Social categorization: The process of thinking about someone as a member of a meaningful social group. Also useful and efficient, but not without its problems…
*For example, when we see someone wearing a white lab coat with a stethoscope around their neck. We are likely to quickly categorize this individual as a member of the category “doctor” given the overlap of the attributes of the person with our exemplar for what a “doctor” looks like.
Is social categorization automatic?
When we interact with someone new, what features of this individual are we likely to remember, if nothing else?
-Gender
-Age
-Race
Taylor, Fiske, Etcoff, & Ruderman, 1978?
Participants are shown a slideshow of people from different social categories (men and women) interacting in a discussion group and then asked to identify who made each of the discussion statements.
-Half are told they will be asked to recall who said what
-Half are not told anything
Results of Taylor et al. (1978)?
Goals of Social Categorization?
Useful and efficient means of characterizing individuals.
Stereotypes: Beliefs about the characteristics of social groups and the members of those groups
E.g., Italians are Romantic*
Stereotype Knowledge?
Stereotypes are learned through direct contact with members of the categorized group, through communication with parents and peers, and exposure to media.
-Widespread consensus regarding the content of stereotypes (Madon et al. 2001)
-Most people know the content, even if not endorsed
Kernel of Truth
Assessing stereotype accuracy requires three steps:
1. Assess people’s descriptive beliefs about a group (e.g., “What proportion of Asian Americans complete college?”)
- Identify criteria that establish group characteristics (e.g., U.S. Census data on the proportion of Asian Americans who complete college)
3.. Compare beliefs to criteria.
*So for example, we could ask people “what proportion of Asian Americans complete college?”
Stereotype Use?
Problematic when we fail to see members of groups as individuals, and evaluate them solely on their group membership
-Prejudice: A negative attitude toward members of a social category
-Discrimination: Negative behaviors enacted against members of a social category on the basis of their membership
Cognitive Efficiency?
If stereotypes save us time, we should be more likely to use them when we have reduced cognitive abilities.
Bodenhausen (1990)
Participants asked to evaluate the degree to which a defendant is guilty of a crime (e.g. cheating on an exam). Though the evidence is inconclusive, stereotypes of the defendant “fit” the crime (e.g. student athletes are more likely to cheat).
Bodenhausen (1990)
Over-Reliance on Stereotypes?
Categorization of individuals on the basis of gender occurs automatically. Once categorized, stereotypes follow.
The stereotype may influence our evaluations of the individual.
These evaluations may lead to prejudice and discriminatory behavior.
Importantly, all of these process can occur outside of our conscious awareness.
MacNell, Driscoll, & Hunt (2015)?
*MacNell and colleagues were interested in whether gender stereotypes would affect evaluations of job performance.
*For example, research looking at student evaluations of their college professors reveals that women and minorities consistently receive more negative evaluations from students than do White men. But, because this is not an experiment, we can’t know if this is due to stereotypes and prejudice, or actual differences in performance.
Examined student evaluations of an online class as a function of the purported gender of the instructor.
Participants were randomly assigned to one of four discussion groups for an online (anthro) class
Plant, Goplen, & Kuntsman (2011)?
Participants were instructed to pretend they were police officers chasing dangerous suspects and that they should “shoot” those with guns, but not shoot those holding other objects (e.g., a wallet, cell phone).
Pictures of people’s faces paired with objects appeared at various positions on the computer screen. Participants pressed ‘A’ on the keyboard for shoot and ‘L’ to not shoot
Results of Plant et al. Study?
Outgroup men are more likely to be mistakenly shot when unarmed.
*when the targets are black men – individuals are much more likely to shoot an unarmed target.
Perceptual Accentuation
Tajfel and Wilkes (1963)?
Performed a simple experiment to examine the potential outcomes of categorization. Participants were asked to judge the length of six lines.
*Participants were shown a set of lines of varying lengths. In one condition the lines were ordered from tallest to shortest, with no grouping, as in the top panel of the figure. In the other condition the exact same lines were shown, but lines were drawn below the lines, indicating a grouping or categorization. Tajfel and Wilkes predicted that this categorization would lead participants to see the two groups of lines as more different from each other than they were in perceived in the top panel, and perceive the lines within each group as more similar.
Group Differentiation?
Tendency to amplify perceived
between-group differences.
Group Homogeneity?
Tendency to amplify within
group similarities.
Outgroup homogeneity?
*An example of this is the tendency for young people to assume that the elderly are all very similar to one another. Young people will recognize that their own generation contains a diverse variety of different kinds of individuals, but will readily apply a stereotype about the elderly across all members of the category.
The tendency to view members of outgroups as extremely similar to each other.
We apply stereotypes across all members of an outgroup, viewing them as all the same, but view members of our own group as much more variable
E.g. Young people evaluate the elderly as more similar to one another than young people
Confirmation Bias?
The tendency to only seek out information that confirms our pre-existing beliefs.
Confirmatory information is often better remembered than disconfirming information.
Subtyping?
The tendency to respond to members of a target group who disconfirm theirstereotypesby seeing them as exceptions to the rule and placing them in a separate subcategory apart from members who confirm the stereotype.
*As an example of both of these processes in action, imagine someone who is very prejudiced against Muslims and believes the stereotype that all Muslims are terrorists.
Self-Fulfilling Prophecy?
The outcome of behaving in accordance with one’s expectations so that those expectations come true.
*As a simple example of the self-fulfilling prophecy. Imagine that you are a tourist in a small-town. You may have the expectation that “small town folks are really nice.” The self-fulfilling prophecy that your expectation will lead you to act in a way, that will eventually result in the confirmation of your expectation. Importantly, this could occur, even if, in reality, the expectation was inaccurate. So, continuing our example, if you think that small town folks are really nice, then your behavior will reflect that expectation
Rosenthal & Jacobson (1968)?
Study of 18 classrooms across 6 grade levels.
Children take an IQ test – teachers think it is identifying which children will be “high bloomers”.
20% of children are randomly assigned to be “high bloomers”
At the end of the year, children take another IQ test
Results of Rosenthal & Jacobson Study?
The results of the study strongly supported the self-fulfilling prophecy. Kids who the teachers expected to do better actually had greater academic gains!
On average, “high bloomers” had better grades, and increased their IQ scores by 4 points more than non-bloomers. The effect was particularly strong, for those kids in the younger grades. High bloomers were also judged by teachers as better behaved, friendlier, more intellectually curious, and evaluated as having a greater chance for future success.
Social categorization involves comparing a chair that you’ve never seen before (i.e., a newly encountered stimulus) to your prototypical example of a chair, which is called…
The exemplar
___ is the tendency to amplify perceived between-group differences.
Group differentiation
When applying a stereotype of a group of people to a single individual, that stereotype’s accuracy at describing that single individual is…
Often wrong/inaccurate and leads to problematic consequences.
Regarding the accuracy of general stereotypes…
Stereotypes are, on average, accurate.
Gordon Allport’s (1954) ?
Gordon Allport = 1 of most famous psychologists – intergroup bias & prejudice
* In book: expressed frustration & hopelessness to solve prejudice
Jane Elliott?
Jane Elliott conducted a naturalistic study to examine whether she could create prejudice among her students by creating a status hierarchy of groups based on eye color.
Robbers Cave Study?
Boys attending a summer camp were split into two groups
-Boys were not aware of one another’s presence for the first 7 days
-Homogeneous sociocultural economic and educational backgrounds
-All were 11 years old.
Stage 1 – Ingroup Formation?
Researchers made certain that all interactions were as cooperative as possible in order to create cohesion within each group.
-Boys worked to improve campground (e.g., swimming hole).
-Norms developed within the groups (e.g., don’t cry, be tough, don’t get homesick)
-Leaders emerged in each group
Stage 2 – Friction Phase?
Boys are told that another group of boys had joined the camp and that they would be competing against one another.
-Each team stenciled on their shirts and hats, developed group names: Eagles and Rattlers
-Even without meeting the group, there was a preference for their ingroup members.
Realizing there is an “Other”?
“THEY better not be swimming in OUR swimming hole, THEY better not be on OUR baseball diamond.”
-Rattlers so possessive of baseball field put flag w rattle snake ”marking territory”
Escalating Conflict via Competition?
The camp counselors informed them that the groups would compete in a tournament of activities.
-Baseball games, tug-of-war, touch football, cabin inspections, skits and songs, and a treasure hunt.
-Prize: A trophy, medal for each boy, and a 4 bladed knife
Day One of Competition?
The Rattlers won the day’s competition.
-The Eagles accused them of cheating.
-Ripped down the Rattler’s flag and burned it.
-Upon discovery of the burned flag the next morning, a fight broke out.
Day Two of Competition?
The next day the Eagles won. They attributed their win to praying and being good.
They vowed to remain good and to not “cuss” as much as the bad Rattlers.
Developed a group norm encouraging prayer before contests with the Rattlers.
Continued Conflict Between Groups?
-Raided each other’s campgrounds.
-Created hate messages on flags.
-Incessant name-calling (communist, sissy, cry baby)
-Many physical fights.
-Held noses when they walked by one another.
-Refused to eat together.
-Made attribution errors
Tajfel et al., 1971?
Participants are asked to estimate the number of dots on a screen for a series of trials.
-Task: guess # dots
-Wrote down guesses independently
Then assigned in 1 of 2 groups:
-Underestimators
-Overestimators
-not meaningful
Realistic Conflict Theory?
Conflict between groups stems from competition for scarce resources
*including food, territory, wealth, power, natural resources, and energy.
Scapegoat Theory?
Scapegoat theory argues that intergroup conflict occurs when a group who has experienced frustration from some environmental hardship, such as economic decline in the country, and places blame for that hardship on the members of another group.
*The name of the theory comes from Leviticus in the bible, in which the sins of a community are transferred to a goat, and then the goat is cast into the desert, ridding the community of their sins.
Scapegoat Theory (Real World Examples)
The frustrating economic decline in Germany following WWI is argued to be in part responsible for the hostility expressed toward the Jewish people.
Hovland & Sears, 1940
Anti-Black bias in the South between 1882 and 1930 increased with economic declines. Indeed the price of cotton was strongly negatively associated with the number of lynchings of Black men by Whites.
Social Identity Theory?
-We desire to feel good about ourselves.
-Part of our identity comes from the groups to which we belong.
-Comparing our ingroups with outgroups that are less well off can raise our self-esteem.
*People whose self-esteem is threatened by failure may attack members of outgroups
*Students are more likely to criticize a minority student after they suffer an individual failure (Fein & Spencer, 1997)
Evolutionary Theory?
-Living in groups was important for human survival.
-Conflict with other groups occurs over access to resources.
-Territory, food, water, mates.
Sex Differences:
*Men stand to gain more from competition with other groups. Greater access to resources makes them more desirable as a potential mate.
*Women have a limited reproductive ceiling, making conflict with other groups a high-risk endeavor with few individual pay-offs.
The Male-Warrior Hypothesis?
Prediction: Selection has favored psychological traits that increase the propensity to engage in intergroup competition and the likelihood of success.
-Coalitional preferences
-Team based Sports
-Prejudice and Discrimination
-Intergroup conflict and warfare
For example, men tend to prefer large social networks of same-sex friends, whereas women more strongly prefer dyadic relationships. Men’s preferences for larger social groups of other men, has been argued to reflect their evolved psychology for building and maintaining coalitions for intergroup conflict.
Explaining Intergroup Conflict?
There are a variety of theories to explain why intergroup conflict is so pervasive. These theories are not mutually exclusive.
Discontinuity Effect?
This is the tendency for greater competitiveness to emerge in interactions between groups, relative to interactions between individuals.
*For example, the individual members of the Eagles and Rattlers acted cooperatively with one another within each group, until they knew there was another group at the camp, and then intergroup conflict quickly emerged.
Pemberton, Insko, & Shoepler (1996)?
Participants reported their interactions for a week. Indicating if they were with groups or individuals, and whether they were competitive or cooperative.
Interactions between groups were more likely to be competitive than interactions involving individuals – even when excluding sports interactions
Insko et al., 1987?
They had participants play a series of prisoner’s dilemma games, either as an individual playing against another individual, as a nominal group playing against another nominal group, or as a 3-person group playing against another 3-person group.
Why are group interactions more competitive?
Individuals’ competitive behavior is less identifiable in a group and less subject to sanctions.
Individuals may perceive groups as a coalition – capable of engaging in coordinated competitive action.
Recall that groups with greater entitativity were perceived as more likely to engage in negative actions (Dasgupta et al., 1999).
If you expect another group to compete, you are more likely to also compete.
Group Differentiation?
This is our tendency to emphasize the differences between groups, rather than the similarities.
Outgroup Homogeneity Bias?
This is the tendency to assume that the members of outgroup are very similar to each other, whereas members of your own group are perceived to be more heterogeneous. This is problematic because it allows negative information about the group as a whole, such as stereotypes, to be applied to every individual in the group.
Attribution Errors?
When we need to explain the causes of our own behavior, we are more likely to engage in a self-serving attribution bias. That is, we attribute our good behavior to our personal traits, abilities, and actions. But when engage in bad behavior, we are likely to attribute the behavior to external factors, such as unfair circumstances or bad luck.
Ultimate Attribution Error?
The tendency for perceivers to attribute negative actions performed by members of the outgroup to dispositional qualities and positive action to situational, fluctuating circumstances.
Dehumanization?
Dehumanization is process by which we perceive that a group or an individual lacks humanness.
EX: We avoid making eye contact with homeless people, as if they don’t exist as humans in our social world, they can be completely ignored.
Moral Exclusion?
Devaluing of individuals so intensely that the principles of morality no longer apply to them. This serves to rationalize extremely negative treatment against a dehumanized outgroup.
*In other words, when we don’t consider someone human, it is much easier to justify extremely negative actions against them.
The Contact Hypothesis?
Gordon Allport
Hypothesized that conflict between groups could be reduced with increased contact and communication between groups.
Conditions for Successful Contact?
1.) Supportive norms endorsed by local authorities that encourage friendly, helpful, egalitarian attitudes, and condemn biased intergroup comparisons.
2.) Groups are of equal status, at least in contact setting
Contact allows for personal interaction with out group members.
3.) Groups cooperate toward common goals.
Is contact effective reducing intergroup prejudice?
Yes.
Why Contact Works?
-Contradicts out group stereotypes.
-Decrease anxiety.
-Changes social norms.
Superordinate Goals at Robbers Cave?
Researchers forced the boys to cooperate toward common goals, such as starting a bus to take them all to a movie, or fixing a water tank.
Intergroup Contact in the Classroom?
Desegregation in schools following the Brown vs Board of Education (1954) failed to promote positive contact between Black and Whites.
-School authorities expressed hostility
-Black students were not treated fairly
-Contact was superficial
-No common goals
Jigsaw Classroom?
A team-learning technique in which individuals of diverse backgrounds are grouped together. The group is given a goal that can only be accomplished if the individuals work together.
Each individual is responsible for learning a key concept (puzzle piece) for the overall study unit, and then teaching that information to the rest of the group.
(Aronson et al., 1997)
Common Ingroup Identity?
A model for reducing bias between groups by emphasizing an identity that is shared by both parties.
Niger et al. (2001)?
Black and white interviewers approached white students who were attending a football game and asked them to help out by completing a questionnaire.
The interviewers also wore hats representing one of the two universities who were playing in the game.
Examined whether individuals would cooperate with the interviewer more when they shared a common group identity.
Results of Niger et al. (2001)?
Black interviewers received more cooperation from participants when they wore a hat signaling a common group identity.
Which of the following is the only pre-condition (i.e., prerequisite) that is required for intergroup conflict to occur between 2 or more groups?
Knowing the fact that at least 2 differing groups exist
___ is/are the tendency for greater competitiveness to emerge in interactions between groups.
The discontinuity effect
Jane Elliot’s Blue Eyes-Brown Eyes work with the 3rd graders demonstrated that it was EASY for friendly, innocent, and playful individuals…
To become nasty, mean, and discriminatory.
Which of the following is NOT a process that perpetuates intergroup conflict?
a. None of these choices
b. Attribution errors
c. Perceptual accentuation
d. Dehumanization
A. None of these choice
The Robber’s Cave (1954) study demonstrated that competition accelerated outgroup bias. The Minimal Groups study demonstrated that outgroup bias between any 2 groups…
Could occur without competition for limited resources.
Which of the following modifications contributed to the reduction of intergroup conflict between the Rattlers and the Eagles in Robbers Cave?
a. Being encouraged by the supervisors to eat together
b. Removal of competition by cancelling the tournament
c. All these choices
d. Given common goals that could only be achieved with complete cooperation
C. All of these choices
In the Nier et al. (2001) reading, black interviewers wearing the home team’s hat received more cooperation (i.e., more help in completing the offered survey) from participants than white interviewers did. What was/were the researchers’ main reason(s) explaining this finding?
Aversive racism, and black individuals were perceived as “new” in-group members
Which theory of intergroup conflict includes the notion that groups compete for limited resources AND the notion that human psychological sex differences exist?
Evolutionary theory
Aronson’s ‘Jigsaw Classroom’ is a technique where…
Each individual learns a key concept for the overall task, and then must teach that concept to the rest of the group in order for the group to accomplish its task.
When considering the 4 theories of intergroup conflict, it is important to note that…
These 4 theories are not mutually exclusive (i.e., all theories simultaneously play a role explaining why intergroup conflict occurs).
