Intergroup Conflict Outline Sources of intergroup conflict Competition

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.

Robbers Cave Experiment (Sherifs, 1961) – 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

Robbers Cave Experiment (Sherifs, 1961)

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/Mc. Coy 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 Sears, 1940)

Class Activity • Form two groups: – Group A: People wearing tennis shoes – Group B: People not wearing tennis shoes • Group tasks: – Group A: • List as many reasons as you can think of as to why the members of group B did not wear tennis shoes today. – Group B: • List as many reasons as you can think of as to why the members of group A are wearing tennis shoes today.

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

Social Categorization – 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

Social Categorization • 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!

Intergroup Conflict Resolution • 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: – Should results in success!

Intergroup Conflict Resolution • 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