Lecture 8 - Intergroup Relations and Conflict

Question 1

What is intergroup behaviour?

Answer 1

• “Any perception, cognition or behaviour that is influenced by people’s recognition that they and others are members of distinct social groups is intergroup behaviour”
• (Hogg & Vaughan, 2014, p.402)

Question 2

What is the in-group?

Answer 2

Any social group which we feel a sense of belonging/investment/identify with

Question 3

What is the out-group?

Answer 3

Alternative groups we don’t have a sense of investment/belonging to

Question 4

What is relative deprivation?

Answer 4

• Motivational account
• A sense of having less than we feel entitled to
• Perceived gap between expectations or entitlements (‘what ought to be’) and attainments (‘what is’)
• Deprivation is not absolute but relative to other conditions
• Crucial precondition for intergroup aggression (Walker & Smith, 2002)

Question 5

How does relative deprivation link to social unrest?

Answer 5

• Berkowitz (1962) - intergroup prejudice and discriminatory behaviour function of:
• Aversive events e.g. subjective frustration
• Aggressive associations (e.g. situational cues, past associations)

Question 6

What is an example of relative deprivation leading to collective violence?

Answer 6

• 1965 LA riots
• Collective violence through social facilitation processes

Question 7

What is egoistic relative deprivation?

Answer 7

• Feeling of having less than we feel we are entitled to
• Relative to our personal aspirations/experiences or to other individuals
• E.g. a colleague getting a promotion over you

Question 8

What is fraternalistic relative deprivation?

Answer 8

• Sense that our group has less than it is entitled to
• Relative to the collective aspirations or other groups
• Associated with social unrest

Question 9

What is realistic conflict theory (Sherif, 1966)?

Answer 9

• Sherif (1966): where groups compete over scarce resources, intergroup relations become marked by conflict & ethnocentrism arises (Hogg & Vaughan, 2014, p.408)
• Ethnocentrism:
• “View of things in which one’s own group is at the centre of everything, and all others are scaled and rated with reference to it…” (Sumner, 1906, p. 13)
• Evaluative preference for all aspects of own group relative to other groups
• Resources e.g. tangible (land), economic (access to jobs), conceptual (power)

Question 10

Describe Sherif’s summer camp studies

Answer 10

• Children invited to summer camp (actually a field experiment)
• Four phases:
• (1) Spontaneous friendship formation
• (2) In-group and norm formation (ensure not a function of likeness)
• (3) Intergroup competition
• (4) Intergroup cooperation

Question 11

What happened in phase 1?

Answer 11

• Arrived at camp
• Engaged in various activities, friendships formed

Question 12

What happened in phase 2?

Answer 12

• Camp divided into two groups, friendships split
• Groups isolated, separate living quarters and daily activities, developed norms and status differences

Question 13

What happened in phase 3?

Answer 13

• Introduction of competitive games between the groups -> competition and intergroup hostility
• Ethnocentric attitudes and behaviour amplified
• Majority of intergroup encounters degenerated into intergroup hostility
• Intergroup relations deteriorated -> two of the experiments concluded at this stage

Question 14

What happened in phase 4?

Answer 14

• Groups provided with superordinate goals (goals desired by two groups but can only be achieved if the two groups work together)
• Groups had to work together in cooperation e.g. superordinate goal = everyone needed to help with broken down truck
• Cooperation between the groups to achieve superordinate goal lead to a reduction in intergroup conflict

Question 15

What are the different goals in realistic conflict theory?

Answer 15

• Nature of goals determines relations
• Mutually exclusive goals between groups -> realistic intergroup conflict and ethnocentrism
• Shared (superordinate) goals -> cooperation and reduction in conflict
• Limitation – cannot explain why intergroup conflict occurs in the absence of a competitive situation

Question 16

Describe further support for realistic conflict theory

Answer 16

• Useful for studying conflict in applied settings
• Brewer & Campbell (1976): greater derogation of more proximal tribal groups
   Direct competition for scarce resources
• Fisher (1990, 2005): establishing superordinate goals can reduce IG conflict between communities & nations
• BUT:
• Competitive IG behaviour also
• Under conditions of explicitly non-competitive or cooperative intergroup relations

Question 17

What is the minimal group paradigm (MGP)?

Answer 17

• NOT A THEORY – experimental paradigm which forms the base of social identity theory
• Tajfel et al. (1971)
• MGP: experimental methodology to investigate effect of social categorisation alone on behaviour
• Assigned participants to 2 groups (arbitrary selection – preference of painting)
• Participants only knew their own group membership, not other members or other group
• Identity of recipients was unknown
• Asked to allocate money to others (not self)
• In-group favouritism (allocated more points)
• Despite no history, no self-interest, identity of other members of each group unknown

Question 18

What did Billing and Tajfel (1973) find?

Answer 18

• Random allocation to X/Y toss of coin (more arbitrary)
• To eliminate possibility that participants may infer that people in same group interpersonally similar to one another because of artist preference
• Mere allocation to a group produced in-group favouritism, and competitive intergroup behaviour

Question 19

What is social identity theory?

Answer 19

• “Theory of group membership and intergroup relations based on self-categorisation, social comparison, and the construction of a shared self-definition in terms of in-group defining properties” (Hogg & Vaughan, 2014, p.418)
• Social categories provide members with a ‘social identity’ = part of self-concept derived from membership of social groups
• Positive distinctiveness and self-enhancement (e.g. favour in-group)

Question 20

How may intergroup relations be improved according to realistic conflict theory?

Answer 20

• Existence of super-ordinate goals gradually reduces intergroup hostility and conflict
• BUT:
• Superordinate goals: problem if fail to achieve -> unsuccessful intergroup cooperation may worse IG relations if failure attributed to out-group

Question 21

How may the contact hypothesis (Allport, 1954) improve intergroup relations?

Answer 21

• “Bringing members of opposing social groups together will improve intergroup relations and reduce prejudice & discrimination” (Hogg & Vaughan, 2014, p.441)
• Conditions for contact (Allport, 1954):
• Should be prolonged & involve cooperative activity (work together)
• Contact between people or groups of equal social status
• Should occur within framework of official and institutional support for integration