No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Extending the Theory of Realistic Conflict to Competition in Institutional Settings: Intergroup Status and Outcome
Abstract
The authors analyzed the extent to which the Theory of Realistic Conflict can be extended to institutional settings in which groups are not actively involved in decisions but are passive targets of decisions taken by an institutional authority (the rector). A negative interdependence between the in-group (psychology) and a high- or low-status outgroup (engineering versus nursing) was established by an institutional authority (the rector). The competition (induced by the rector) was beneficial (an increase in the budget previously invested in the faculty) or detrimental (a decrease in the budget) for the in-group. The results confirmed that competition affects mutual attitudes, images, and behaviors of groups even if the groups are passive targets of decisions that the institutional authority makes. Moreover, competition--regardless of whether beneficial or detrimental--deteriorated images of and attitudes toward high-status out-groups. In contrast, competition improved images and opinions about low-status out-groups, but only in the loss condition.
... Based on this representation, there may be a realistic perception of intergroup conflict over the distribution of limited material resources, focused on survival. In the literature on intergroup relations, it is frequently emphasized that intergroup competition increases conflict (e.g., Böhm et al., 2020;Echebarria-Echabe & Guede, 2003;Gordils et al., 2021). Such a perception of competition for limited resources may emerge as an economic threat and financial burden representation. ...
... Bu temsilin temelinde, hayatta kalmaya odaklı, kısıtlı maddi kaynağın bölüşümüne yönelik gruplar arası gerçekçi bir çatışma algısı olabilir. Gruplar arası ilişkiler yazınında da gruplar arası rekabetin çatışmayı arttırdığı sıklıkla vurgulanmaktadır (örn., Böhm ve diğ., 2020;Echebarria-Echabe ve Guede, 2003;Gordils ve diğ., 2021). ...
... Echebarria-Echabe ve Guede, 2003). Bu tür davranışlar ile ilişkili olarak üyeler dış gruplarını görece olumsuz değerlendirmeye bilişsel olarak daha hazır hale gelmektedir. ...
This research aims to describe the Syrian refugee representations of the participants who identify themselves as Turk (advantaged group) or Kurd (disadvantaged group) in the context of social identity and realistic conflict and to examine the relationship of these representations with the participants' ingroup identifications. We conducted a semi-structured interview with 34 participants (16 women, Mage = 39.6) and measured participants' ingroup identifications. The representations of the participants about Syrian refugees were grouped under seven negative themes as follows); the economic burden and financial threat Syrian, cultural pollutant Syrian, societal destructive Syrian, immigrant Syrian, Syrian who fled from own homeland, beggar and homeless Syrian, Syrian with many children. Consistency among judges for all themes was found to be above the acceptable threshold. Greater ingroup identification is associated with having more financial threat Syrian representation. However, ingroup identification did not predict the power of financial threat Syrian representation. Syrian refugees are represented more as a financial threat than as a cultural pollutant. No difference was observed between Turks and Kurds in terms of the having representation of Syrian refugees as a financial or cultural threat. We discussed the findings in the context of social identity, intergroup competition, realistic and symbolic threat, and how these negative representations about Syrian refugees could be transformed to prevent possible social problems.
... Stereotypes ascribe a group of people a virtual social identity, by giving an identity to an individual without a necessary interaction (Goffman 1963). Status and discrimination are strongly linked, making representations of out-groups worse when the out-group is in a lower position than the in-group (Echebarría and Fernández 2003;Echebarría and Gonzales 1996). However, society and its predominant discourses affect the way these prejudices are thought of and felt by the predominant group. ...
... Vliegenthart and Boomgaarden (2007) found that real-world events are used as journalistic prototypes, helping pass the news threshold of the minimum requirement to be considered newsworthy. The neighborhood press clearly missed out on the chance to help foster inclusion and integration within the neighborhood by defining a group of people as immigrants, which infers two differentiated groups, the in-group and the out-group, which in turn carries along a status stratification (Echebarría and Fernández 2003;Echebarría and Gonzales 1996). ...
This research studied the way immigration is depicted by the neighborhood press of Barcelona. Mainstream media tend to give visibility to immigrants when problems arise. Through this visibility based on problems, and the processes of framing, a virtual social identity is constructed and given to the immigration population. However, the neighborhood press of Barcelona, inscribed within the Catalan regional press’ own idea of journalism, offers a different approach to this issue due to its history, neighborhood and commitment to the region. Through a frame analysis, three main frames gave a depiction of the immigrants different from the one the mainstream media use. The results show that this differentiated depiction still stereotypes immigrants while not granting them enough visibility even when there is no blaming or attack. In this sense, while accounting for the differences, the neighborhood press of Barcelona misses a chance of depicting immigration in a more accurate way.
... Our study makes further theoretical contributions by demonstrating the utility of a well-established theory (RCT) in the context of a competitive gamble. Past research has focused on RCT and its applications in immigrant prejudice (Z arate, Garcia, Garza, & Hitlan, 2004), racial and ethnic prejudice (Brief et al., 2005), and high-status, out-group bias (Echebarria-Echabe & Guede, 2003), but none has attempted to use RCT in a gambling context. Given that the basis of RCT that there is a zero-sum situation in which one loses at the expense of another-is similar to the nature of a competitive gamble, we have expanded the scope of RCT to competitive gambling and established a related concept of likeability as an explanation of the lose-aggression relationship. ...
This study aimed to examine the effects of gambling motives and competitive gambling outcomes on opponent likeability and targeted physical aggression. We hypothesized that (a) losers would perceive their opponents to be less likeable and (b) would be physically more aggressive toward their opponents. Opponent likeability was proposed to mediate the lose–aggression relationship while social gambling motives were proposed to moderate the lose–aggression relationship. Specifically, we expected that losers of competitive gambling situations would engage in greater physical aggression only if they perceived their opponents to be less likeable. In addition, lower perceived opponent likeability would translate into greater targeted physical aggression only if the loser possessed low social motives for gambling. Ninety‐eight undergraduates who self‐identified mostly as recreational gamblers participated in a competitive gambling game. The Hot Sauce Paradigm was adapted as a measure of targeted physical aggression. Results obtained supported our hypotheses. Potential implications and limitations are discussed.
... Given this antecedent, the theory proposes that intergroup behavior will reflect group interests (Brown, 2010), and people will prefer social arrangements that maximize in-group interests (King, Knight, & Hebl, 2010), such as redistributive policies among low-status individuals and greater concentrations of power or money among high-status people or groups. This theoretical framework has received long-standing empirical support in social psychology (e.g., Brief et al., 2005;Echebarria-Echabe & Fernández Guede, 2003;Insko et al., 1992). ...
This study tests specific competing hypotheses from social dominance theory/realistic conflict theory (RCT) versus system justification theory about the role of social status. In particular, it examines whether system justification belief and effects are stronger among people with low socioeconomic status, and in less socially developed and unequal nations than among better-off people and countries. A cross-national survey was carried out in 19 nations from the Americas, Western and Eastern Europe, Asia, and Oceania using representative online samples (N = 14,936, 50.15% women, Mage = 41.61 years). At the individual level, system justification beliefs, right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, national identification, sociopolitical conservatism, sex, age, and social status were measured. At the national level, the human development index and the Gini index were used. Multilevel analyses performed indicated that results fit better with the social dominance/RCT approach, as system justification was higher in high-status and developed nations; further, associations between legitimizing ideologies and system justification were stronger among high-status people.
Face, understood as public image, exerts critical influence on interpersonal communication. Incorporating insight from cultural neuroscience, a number of potential mismatches with regard to facework are revealed when methodologies originated from the West are applied in a different context. This paper examines culturally appropriate face strategies in cooperative learning among Vietnamese learners. Our results show that discussion outcomes increase when self-face and other-face are confirmed and group-face is mildly confronted in form of intergroup competition. The paper indicates that educational methods underpinned by fundamental psychological assumptions based on Western values should be adjusted to be culturally appropriate for contexts in which it is applied.
This article applies Realistic Conflict Theory to the understanding of Uighur terrorism against the Chinese in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region. By and large, Realistic Conflict Theory posits that disagreement over objectives and competition over limited resources tend to lead to intergroup conflict. By the same token, as an “in-group” mentality emerges, a great amount of discrimination and negative stereotypes are the consequences for the out-group. The Uighurs (a Muslim people) have had complicated relations with China, so much so that they were increasingly bent on creating their own independent state. As the People's Republic of China grew more powerful, its stance toward the Uighurs was reflected through a shift from mild hostilities to more acute persecutions. For these reasons, the Uighurs have resorted to terrorism.
This research investigated the effects of competition and injustice between workgroups and workgroup identification (self-categorization) on individuals' propensity to engage in counterproductive work behavior toward an opposing workgroup. One scenario study revealed that competition and collective injustice had an interactive effect on individuals' willingness to engage in counterproductive behavior. In another scenario study, this effect was moderated by the strength of self-categorization with the group. Finally, a survey study of 110 working adults involving reported counterproductive behavior showed a three-way interaction between competition, collective injustice, and the strength of identification with the workgroup, thus providing additional support for the findings of Study 2. This collection of studies provides initial evidence for the positive influence of intergroup competition under conditions of collective injustice on counterproductive behavior.
This research investigates the role of mood-based expectancies regarding a target's group membership for the impact of individuating information on target judgments. We argue that target judgments in both positive and negative mood may be more or less affected by individuating information depending on whether the target is an ingroup member or an outgroup member. Specifically, in a competitive intergroup setting it should be less congruent with mood-based expectancies when individuals in positive (negative) mood learn that an outgroup (ingroup) member rather than an ingroup (outgroup) member has succeeded. Hence, unexpected (i.e., mood-incongruent) category information should elicit more attention than expected (mood-congruent) category information. More importantly, subsequent individuating information (high vs. low target competence) should be processed more effortful and influence target judgments more strongly given mood-incongruent (vs. mood-congruent) category membership. Findings of an experiment support these predictions. Results are discussed in regard to implications for different research domains.
Scholars since Hume and Smith have debated possible causal connections between market experiences and moral beliefs. Of particular interest today are questions related to incentive designs: for example, could the structure of employment affect moral attitudes? Here, I study the impact of employment structure on three normative issues: utilitarian versus non-utilitarian values, other-regarding preferences, and charitable donations. Through a labor market intermediary, I randomly assigned workers to competitive or piece-rate work conditions. The groups were given a moral question posing a conflict between utilitarian and non-utilitarian values, and offered a choice to make a charitable donation. The moral question was accompanied by an illustration that primed out-group considerations. Competitively structured work experiences increased non-utilitarian value choices, non-utilitarian commitments towards out-group members, and donations by productive workers.
The study is concerned with the influence of western educational approaches upon non-western societies and cultural groups. In applying western educational approaches, often a detailed consideration of its consequences to the culture and heritage of a non-western civilization is neglected. This is both the case of a multicultural classroom where students come from different backgrounds and the case of homogeneous classroom in non-western countries where the western teaching and learning approaches are encouraged because they seem to bring higher academic achievement. The research further draws upon a case study that illustrates the application of Cooperative Learning, an educational method that was developed in a western context. Cautions have been raised, concerning diverse influential factors, one of them identified in this study as the cultural factor which refers to norms and values deeply embedded in the cultural niche and everyday’s life pattern of teachers and students, and to a certain extent may exert influence in how they perceive and practice CL. While we may agree that the roots of CL are extant in all cultures, because cooperation is essential to the functioning of human groups, we should acknowledge that different forms of CL are more likely to thrive in different cultures. This study is dedicated to explore the impact of a specific culture on CL process and outcomes by means of experimental research. The particular cultural reference in the study is focused on Asian Confucian Heritage Cultures, which are the cultures historically under the influence of Confucianism in the following countries: Viet Nam, China, Korea, Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Theoretical analyses conducted to examine what aspect of Asian-CHC specifically may influence CL and in what way reveal a number of domains where cultural conflicts and mismatch are likely to happen when the mainstream CL approaches are applied in Asian context without a rigorous adaptation to improve compatibility with the host culture in the following domains: Leadership; Face; Reward allocation; Group composition; Teacher-Student dyad; Gender; Learning style; and Attitude towards time. Two experimental settings were formed by randomisation. Vietnamese students in one setting received a series of lessons in which CL principles applied in domains of focus are associated with the mainstream CL theories and practice. Students in the other setting received similar lessons but CL in these lessons were modified so as to be more culturally appropriate. Findings show that there is likely to be a discrepancy in how Vietnamese students and the mainstream CL researchers perceive the impact of leadership, the justification of reward allocation, and the effectiveness of group composition based on affect-based trust and social shared identity. When CL was organised in ways that were considered to be culturally appropriate, students reported higher work rates than those who followed a traditional programme. This study links theory directly to practice by formulating nine concrete CL instructional design principles to be considered in curriculum and task design with Vietnamese students in particular, and Asian-CHC learners in general, as target group. Arguing that CL is not value-free, the study points out a challenge for educational leaders to balance the changing demands put on learners and teachers as a consequence of globalisation, while being sensitive to the equally important task of addressing the need to value the cultural context of learners and teachers.
Communication between people from diverse organizational units can facilitate innovation. Employees of a postsecondary educational institution were interviewed to obtain specific incidents of when they tried to solve problems innovatively. The results indicate that employees with cooperative goals, but not those with competitive and independent goals, communicated openly and skillfully, made progress in solving the problem, developed high-quality and creative solutions, efficiently used their resources, felt positive about the experience, and expected to work with others successfully in the future. The predominant reason given for cooperative goals was common objectives. The results suggest that cooperative goals complement the skillful communication of diverse perspectives to foster innovation in an organization.
Based on social identity theory, the authors predicted that in ongoing intergroup competition, people’s strength of social identification will have a positive impact on their behavioral efforts on behalf of an ingroup when its current status is low, whereas this will not be the case when its current status is high. In a first experiment, male participants showed the expected pattern of behavior. Female participants, however, tended to display opposite reactions. As a possible explanation, it was argued that the experimental procedure may have inadvertently evoked a gender-based stereotype threat for female participants. In an attempt to obtain more consistent support for their hypothesis, the authors therefore replicated the experiment with modifications to avoid such a threat. These changes proved to be effective in the sense that this time the predicted interaction effect between ingroup identification and current group status was obtained for both male and female participants.
The questions the authors address in this chapter can be traced over two decades of work by J. T. Spence and her colleagues. More than any other single researcher, Spence has sought to establish the content of beliefs about women, to determine whether these beliefs are merely descriptions of women or prescriptions for how women ought to be, and to document what has changed and what has remained the same in attitudes toward women across decades of social turmoil in male–female relations. This article addresses the issue of whether gender stereotypes are purely descriptive expectations or prescriptions that are enforced through punishment when they are violated. Implicit in the question is the notion that "feminine" women are seen as very likable but as less competent than men. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The status of black Americans is the longest standing and most glaring exception to the American promise of freedom and equality. For this, as well as other reasons, social psychologists have long sought to shed light on the ways in which racial attitudes, beliefs, and values affect and are affected by patterns of black-white relations. Blackwhite relations now seem more complex and contradictory than ever before. From basic economic and demographic indicators to indicators of racial attitudes and beliefs, simultaneous patterns of progress, deterioration, and lack of change can be discerned.
This study investigated the independent effects of status differential on intergroup behaviour. Using a variant of the minimal group paradigm (Tueland Turner, 1979), subjects were categorized into groups of differing status (high, equal, low) with two levels of category salience (high, low). Using Tajfel's matrices subjects rated the creativity of products ostensibly produced by ingroup and outgroup members. Own group identification, intergroup perceptions and self-reported strategies on the matrices constituted the other dependent measures. Results indicated a main effect for group status but none for salience. Equal status groups discriminated against each other thus replicating the minimal intergroup discrimination effect. High and equal status group members were more discriminatory against outgroups and more positive about their own group membership than were low status group members. In contrast, low status group members engaged in significant amounts of outgroup favouritism. Results also showed that social categorization per se was sufficient to elicit more ingroup than outgroup liking amongst all group members regardless of status differentials between groups. Overall, the results illustrate important aspects of the interplay between group status, social identity, prejudice and discrimination.
Using a variant of the minimal group paradigm (Tajfel and Turner, 1986), this study tested the effects of power, status and group numbers on intergroup behaviours and perceptions. Subjects (N = 160) were categorized into groups that varied on status (high or low), power (dominant or subordinate) and group numbers (majority or minority) variables within a 2 × 2 × 2 experimental design. Based on their evaluations of others' creative products, subjects distributed credit points to ingroup and outgroup others using the Tajfel matrices. Results showed that dominant group members were much more discriminatory and less parity oriented towards outgroup others than subordinate group members. High status group members were more discriminatory and less parity oriented than low status group members. Minority group members who were dominant and of high status were highly discriminatory and were unique in showing no parity whatsoever towards outgroup others. Subordinate low status minorities did not discriminate and were exceptional in showing out-group favouritism. Relative to group status and group numbers, group power seemed more predictive of actual discriminatory behaviour. Group status accounted for the greatest variance in social identification and intergroup perceptions measures. Results also showed that social categorization was sufficient to elicit more in-group than outgroup liking amongst all group members regardless of their position in the intergroup structure. Overall, this study indicated that power, status and group numbers independently and in combination, have a strong impact on intergroup behaviours and perceptions.
The two volumes of The Social Dimension present a comprehensive survey of the major developments in social psychology which took place in Europe during the very active 1970s and 1980s. They aim to capture the diversity and vitality of the discipline, stress the growing emphasis on fully social analyses of social psychological phenomena - hence 'the social dimension' - and to provide a valuable resource for researchers in the future. Although comprehensive in scope, the volumes are not written in the formal style of a reference handbook. Instead, the authors of the thirty-three chapters, drawn from more than a dozen mainly European countries and all experts in their own fields, were invited to present their own personal overviews of the issues in social psychology on which they were actively working. Both volumes are organized into three main Parts. Volume 1 is concerned with the social development of the child, interpersonal communication and relationships, and the social reality, group processes, and intergroup relations. This ambitious enterprise has produced a distinctive yet authoritative summary and evaluation of the growth points of social psychology in Europe which will interest and influence not only social psychologists but many readers from related disciplines.
A central thesis of this chapter is that the distinction between the concepts of “social groups” and “social categories” has been blurred in recent work on intergroup relationships. The conceptual distinction points to three different targets of stereotyping and prejudice: groups qua groups, individual members of groups, and individuals placed in social categories. Differentiating between these three domains will help clarify our understanding of what are distinctive phenomena involving distinctive psychological processes. More importantly, in dealing with stereotypes and prejudice, the differentiation should aid us in designing interventions that will be directed at the processes specific to each domain.
According to our reciprocal interdependence hypothesis, derived from the Behavioural Interaction model (BIM), groups in a Prisoner's Dilemma Game (PDG) will strive more for the long-term goal of mutual cooperation than individuals, provided that the other (programmed) opponent can be expected or trusted to cooperate as well. If the opponent seems to follow a competitive or exploitative strategy groups will behave more competitively than individuals (e.g. Rabbie et al., 1982). In other PDG research it is found that groups are almost invariably more competitive or less cooperative than individuals (e.g. Schopler & Insko 1992). Our conjecture is that this individual-group discontinuity effect may be partly attributed to unique features of the experimental procedures of Schopler and Insko which induce mutual (reciprocal) cooperation between individuals and mutual competition between groups. A review of the evidence seems to provide more support for the reciprocity hypothesis than for the various explanations for the discontinuity effect proposed by Schopler, Insko, and their associates.
This study investigated intergroup perception in well-acquainted groups. Also of interest were the effects of a naturally occurring status differential on these perceptions. The study is framed within the social relations model, which provides a measure of in-group bias as well as 3 innovative measures of out-group homogeneity. Results indicated that low-status groups consistently displayed out-group favoritism. High-status groups displayed in-group bias, but only on ratings of leadership ability. The results also provided consistent evidence of out-group homogeneity. In instances when group status moderated out-group homogeneity effects, members of the high-status groups perceived their in-group as more variable than the out-group, whereas members of the tow-status groups tended to see the in-group and out-group as equally variable.
Two studies are reported in which job applicants recorded the length of time they were required to wait to see an interviewer with whom they had a scheduled appointment. In the first study, it was found that the higher the status of the position for which the applicants were being interviewed (and therefore, the lower the status differential between the applicant and the interviewer), the shorter were the delays they encountered waiting for a superior interviewer. In the second study, applicants waiting to see interviewers of higher status encountered longer delays than those waiting to see interviewers of equal or lower status. These findings are discussed in terms of the status-asserting impressions cultivated by causing others to wait and in terms of the status-neutralizing impressions cultivated by promptness.
Based on models of intergroup competition and social dominance, we examined the impact of perceived economic competition with immigrants on support for empowering and non-empowering forms of assistance for immigrants. In Study 1, a manipulation of perceived economic competition with immigrants caused attenuated support for empowerment but not for non-empowering forms of help. In Study 2, people higher in social dominance orientation were less willing to endorse empowerment for immigrants than were people lower in social dominance orientation, and this relation was mediated by the belief that economic and power gains for immigrants result in economic and power losses for members of host populations. It is suggested that people’s desire to maintain a discrepancy in economic and power resources between immigrants and host populations undermines support for empowering forms of help for immigrants.
Competitive or cooperative relations were imposed between the two experimentally created art discussion groups in each session. Group members indicated their own attitudes and estimated the positions held either by other in-group members or by out-group members in order to assess the effects of target of projection on attitude certainty. As expected, participants assumed greater attitudinal disagreement with competitive compared to cooperative out-groups on the 10 art appreciation issues relevant to their group task. They also assumed more similarity to in-group than to out-group members. Assumed similarity/dissimilarity mediated the effect of projection target on mean increments in attitude certainty, which were greatest in the competitive out-group target condition regardless of issue importance.
This study tests social identity theory and realistic conflict theory by examining intra- and intergroup relations in a team-based community-health care organization. The relationships between people’s patterns of identification (with their work group and with the organization) and their perceptions of intergroup competition for scarce resources are related to in-group favoritism. Questionnaire data gathered from 112 participants, who were members of 17 work groups within the organization, reveal that strong identification with the work group rather than the organization is related to high levels of in-group favoritism, thus supporting the relevance of social identity theory in an organizational setting. In-group identification did not predict between-group discrimination in resource distribution, although such discrimination was demonstrated. We suggest that in applied settings the factors influencing social behavior are more complex than in laboratory studies but that social identity theory has clear practical importance for understanding and influencing the effectiveness of team-based organizations.
The question of whether high-power groups would be more or less ethnocentric than low-power groups was examined in an intergroup conflict over valued resources. Sixty groups of Canadian female undergraduates participated in a simulation in which pairs of groups represented two parties in a dispute over five tracts of land. The pairs were given opposing matrices containing numbers that represented their client's differing preferences for 10 divisions of each tract. Subjects then had to negotiate a favorable settlement for their client through written messages. In the unequal-power conditions of the experiment, the high-power group could threaten to slow the negotiations repeatedly whereas the low-power group could do so only once. In the equal-power conditions, both groups could threaten each other twice. Halfway through the negotiations, progress toward settlement was or was not threatened, supposedly, by the other group. Consistent with Realistic Group Conflict theory (Campbell, 1965; Levine & Campbell, 1972) the results showed that threat increased ethnocentrism both in terms of increased dislike for the out-group and increased distancing along stereotype dimensions. However, this reaction was not moderated by power differences between the groups. These results are discussed in the context of past research, which suggests that high-power are more discriminatory than low-power groups.
Three studies explored intergroup attributional bias. In Exp 1, Muslims (majority) and Hindus (minority) in Bangladesh rated their explanations of in-group and out-group members' positive and negative acts on 4 causal dimensions: locus, stability, controllability by others, and globality. Both groups showed in-group-favoring attributions, but only Muslims were out-group derogating. Causal dimensions predicted affects primarily in in-group-outcome conditions. Exp 2 showed that this bias for Muslims varied across crossed-categorization conditions. Causal dimensions predicted affect and self-esteem in certain conditions. Exp 3 showed that this bias for Hindus was accentuated when social categorizations were made salient. These studies increase understanding of the determinants and consequences of the bias. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
This study investigated intergroup perception in well-acquainted groups. Also of interest were the effects of a naturally occurring status differential on these perceptions. The study is framed within the social relations model, which provided a measure of in-group bias as well as 3 innovative measures of out-group homogeneity. Results indicated that low-status groups consistently displayed out-group favoritism. High-status groups displayed in-group bias, but only on ratings of leadership ability. The results also provided consistent evidence of out-group homogeneity. In instances when group status moderated out-group homogeneity effects, members of the high-status groups perceived their in-group as more variable than the out-group, whereas members of the low-status groups tended to see the in-group and out-group as equally variable. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
why do people persist in disliking and mistrusting people from outgroups / this chapter will highlight some previous attempts to answer this question / develop a new perspective based on negative interdependence between groups, as it influences social cognition / discuss the mechanisms that underlie negative affect toward outgroup members and describe some supporting evidence from both our own research and some of the hallmark works in stereotyping, affect, and prejudice / reconsider two major techniques of negative affect reduction (avoidance and contact) in light of our current perspective (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Subjects classified as more or less xenophobic allocated resources to SWISS nationals (ingroup) and foreign residents (outgroup) in three intergroup judgement modes: negative interdependence, independence and positive interdependence. When both groups were assessed together as a single beneficiary (positive interdependence) they were allocated more resources than those provided to the outgroup under negative interdependence or independence. More xenophobic subjects, however gave less resources to both groups together under positive interdependence than to the ingroup under independence. In contrast, less xenophobic subjects allocated to both groups together a similar amount as to the ingroup under independence. These results suggest that, depending on their initial attitudes towards the outgroup, individuals will categorize a superordinate entity either more as an ingroup or more as an outgroup.
The present study is one of a series exploring the role of social categorization in intergroup behaviour. It has been found in our previous studies that in ‚minimal' situations, in which the subjects were categorized into groups on the basis of visual judgments they had made or of their esthetic preferences, they clearly discriminated against members of an outgroup although this gave them no personal advantage. However, in these previous studies division into groups was still made on the basis of certain criteria of ‚real' similarity between subjects who were assigned to the same category. Therefore, the present study established social categories on an explicitly random basis without any reference to any such real similarity.It was found that, as soon as the notion of ‚group' was introduced into the situation, the subjects still discriminated against those assigned to another random category. This discrimination was considerably more marked than the one based on a division of subjects in terms of interindividual similarities in which the notion of ‚group' was never explicitly introduced. In addition, it was found that fairness was also a determinant of the subjects' decisions.The results are discussed from the point of view of their relevance to a social-cognitive theory of intergroup behaviour.
In this discussion of papers by Doise (1988) and Tajfel (1982) it is argued that a conceptual distinction should be made between social groups and social categories. A social group can be considered as a ‘dynamic whole’ or social system, characterized by the perceived interdependence among its members, whereas a social category can be defined as a collection of individuals who share at least one attribute in common. This distinction is crucial for the understanding of outgroup favouritism in the minimal intergroup situation, the basic similarity between large scale groupings and face-to-face groups, the difference between group identification and social identity and the issue of categorizations versus attributions in intergroup conflict.
Two related field studies investigated social stereotyping and differentiation between student groups in higher education. In the first, subjects from Exeter and Manchester Universities rated students at both institutions on a number of evaluatively positive attributes. They also judged the degree status and prospective employment opportunities of the groups, in a context which rendered these important. Although subjects displayed strategies of positive differentiation, this was restricted to certain ‘consensual’ dimensions, reflecting perceived stereotypic differences between the groups. Discrepancies in the pattern of differentiation between the groups, and with finding of comparable studies, are discussed. This paradigm was then extended to the case where Manchester University subjects rated three groups, including the ingroup (Oxford or Exeter University vs. Manchester University vs. Manchester Polytechnic students). From social identity theory it was predicted that comparisons with a higher status outgroup which also excelled on contextually important dimensions (Oxford/Exeter), would increase positive differentiation of the ingroup from a second, lower status outgroup (Manchester Polytechnic students). This was confirmed, although there was weaker evidence for devaluation of the second outgroup in absolute terms. In both studies the relation of group status and dimensional importance of the material factor of career prospects helped to explain the strategies of differentiation adopted.
After a conceptual and methodological critique of Social Identity Theory (SIT), it is argued, in sharp contrast to SIT but consistent with a Behavioural Interaction Model (BIM), that the allocations in the standard Minimal Group Paradigm (MGP) —which provide the main evidence for SIT— can be best reinterpreted as instrumental, rational behaviour aimed at maximizing the economic self-interests of the subjects rather than efforts on their part to strive for a positive social identity as SIT has claimed. Explicit social categorization appears to be only one of the many unit-forming factors which may affect allocations within and between group boundaries in the MGP.
Group polarization effects indicate that groups, guided by their perceived interdependence on the recipients of their allocations seem more rational and effective than their individual members prior to the group discussion in maximizing their economic outcomes.
Finally, it is concluded that BIM provides probably a more parsimonious explanation of all the usualfindings obtained by the standard MGP than SIT.
This study explores the implicit cognitive structure of role norms in Taiwan. Subjects were asked to make direct pair-wise similarity judgments of 28 role relationships in terms of the way the actor role should treat the object role (e.g., father to son vs. son to father). INDSCAL and cluster analyses were used to delineate the implicit cognitive structure underlying the similarity judgments. INDSCAL showed that Taiwanese implicitly use two dimensions, closeness–distance and dominance–submission, to construct role norms. The first dimension showed that the norm for nuclear family relationships is to love and care for each other. The second dimension revealed that the norm for status-differential relationships such as father–son or supervisor–subordinate is to behave in accordance with one’s status. Cluster analysis indicated four major clusters of role relationships, of which the hierarchical family cluster was the most prominent. Taiwanese adults and college students have similar cognitive structures and use relational models to construct their system of role norms. These relational models include complementarity, communality sharing, authority ranking, and equality matching. The implications of these findings for Confucian ethics and theories of Chinese social behavior are discussed.
The concept of embeddedness has general applicability in the study of economic life and can alter theoretical and empirical approaches to the study of economic behaviors. Argues that in modern industrial societies, most economic action is embedded in structures of social relations. The author challenges the traditional economic theories that have both under- and oversocialized views of the conception of economic action and decisions that merge in their conception of economic actors atomized (separated) from their social context. Social relations are assumed to play on frictional and disruptive, not central, roles in market processes. There is, hence, a place and need for sociology in the study of economic life. Productive analysis of human action requires avoiding the atomization in the extremes of the over- and undersocialized concepts. Economic actors are neither atoms outside a social context nor slavish adherents to social scripts. The markets and hierarchies problem of Oliver Williamson (with a focus on the question of trust and malfeasance) is used to illustrate the use of embeddedness in explicating the proximate causes of patterns of macro-level interest. Answers to the problem of how economic life is not riddled with mistrust and malfeasance are linked to over- and undersocialized conceptions of human nature. The embeddedness argument, on the contrary, stresses the role of concrete personal relations and networks (or structures) in generating trust and discouraging malfeasance in economic life. It finds a middle way between the oversocialized (generalized morality) and undersocialized (impersonal institutional arrangements) approaches. The embeddedness approach opens the way for analysis of the influence of social structures on market behavior, specifically showing how business relations are intertwined with social and personal relations and networks. The approach can easily explain what looks otherwise like irrational behavior. (TNM)
Voluntariness of group membership and intergroup comparison
- M Lindeman
Discrimination and power differentials between same sex and opposite sex groups
- R Y Bourhis
- R Cole
- A Gagnon