Week 5 Lecture Slides: Intergroup Relations

Intergroup Relations Week 5 ATS1262 Understanding Social Behaviour Dr John Gardner 1 Recap of previous weeks… We are social beings. Our sense of self and our self-esteem emerges from our relationship with other people. For example: Self schemas (e.g. ideals relating to...

Intergroup Relations Week 5 ATS1262 Understanding Social Behaviour Dr John Gardner 1 Recap of previous weeks… We are social beings. Our sense of self and our self-esteem emerges from our relationship with other people. For example: Self schemas (e.g. ideals relating to body shape) Looking-glass self (we imagine how others judge us) Social comparison (we compare ourselves to peers) These processes are all deeply tied to our sense of belonging to some groups, and not others. 2  Part 1 What are ‘groups’ in behavioral studies? - Some definitions Part 2 This week… Conflict between groups – some theories - Realistic Group Conflict Theory (RGCT) - Social Identity Theory Part 3 Resolving conflict between groups - Intergroup Contact Hypothesis - Acculturation 3  What are groups? Part 1 See also: Chapter 13 of De Lamater et al 2018. 4 Groups are social units They are characterized by: Membership: Individuals accept each other as members of a group. Interaction: Group members interact with each other in some way. Shared goals: Groups members have common goals Shared norms: Group members share and perpetuate norms 5  Families Religious groups Specific parishes, sects, denominations, religions. Sports teams & recreational groups Work teams Ethnic groups Nation states Ø Most of us belong to multiple groups. Groups – some examples How to make sense of groups? Primary groups: Close-knit, small groups characterized by close and enduring personal relationships Norms and values play a larger role in group cohesion Families, friendship groups, religious groups, etc Secondary groups: Large, impersonal groups, that are often time-limited Cohesion tends to result from shared goals. A corporation, a university class, sports teams. Ingroups (groups we belong to) and outgroups (groups we don’t belong to). 7 Group cohesion The extent to which members of a group desire to remain in a group and resist leaving it (Balkwell, 1994) Social cohesion: The ‘connectedness’ that results when individuals within a group like each other and want to spend time with each other. Task cohesion: The connectedness that results when individuals work together on a shared task. Members of high cohesion groups often have more influence on each other. Conformity is higher… 8 Group norms Dictate what goals are Guide how members should important and how they will be conduct themselves with achieved others in the group Determine what is considered Guide intergroup relations – ‘appropriate behaviour’, and how members should interact can thus be used to distinguish with other groups group members from non- members 9 Why do individuals conform? Groups provide individuals with resources and benefits Emotional & physical support Income Status, positive self-appraisal and self-esteem (Part 2) To manage threats arising from conflict with other groups (part 2) Groups provide individuals with ways to understand social reality Groups provide members cognitive frameworks for making sense of the world Groups shape and validate individual opinions. 10  What groups do you belong to? What are your primary groups? What are your secondary groups Some question Do they have high or low levels of for you! cohesion? What benefits and resources do you receive from your groups? In what ways do your groups shape and validate your opinions? 11  Conflicts & competition Part 2 between groups See also: Jackson 1993, Tajfel 1982. 12 Human history is a history of intergroup competition and conflict… Conflicts between families, clans, religions groups, ethnic groups, nations… Can entail physical violence, hostility, antipathy, discrimination, competition… 13 Competition between groups can change dynamics within groups Increases cohesion: as group goals become more significant, Individuals ‘band-together’ to manage threats Leadership militancy: Group leaders may consolidate their leadership by denouncing outgroups Changes to group norms: Some norms become more significant, others less so. Increased loyalty 14 Why do group conflicts arise? Groups may have differing views/opinions on issues they feel are important. Also… Groups may have competing goals – Realistic (Group) Conflict Theory (RGCT / RCT) Individuals pursue positive self-concept - Social Identity Theory (SIT) 15 Realist Group Conflict Theory - The Robbers Cave Experiment, Sherif and Sherif (1954) The Cummings Center for the History of Psychology – ‘The Robbers Cave Experiment’ Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PRuxMprSDQ&t=3s 16 Realist Group Conflict Theory - The Robbers Cave Experiment, Sherif and Sherif (1954) Quick Recap: Phase 1: Group formation: A culturally homogenous group of boys was divided into two groups. Both groups quickly developed their own norms, rules and hierarchies Phase 2: Intergroup competition: Groups were made to compete in games for rewards. Only the winning team gets rewarded. Aggression and conflict between the groups developed quickly. Phase 3: Tension Reduction: Groups were put in close contact in non-competitive environment. Conflict remained until the were encouraged to cooperate on tasks. 17 Realist Group Conflict Theory - Basic premise 1. Groups compete for scare resources: land, money, jobs, rewards etc. (Scarcity can be perceived or real, often assumes zero-sum fate) 2. Group members experience frustration, resentment and hostility towards competing groups. 3. Group members positively appraise ingroup, while establishing negative stereotypes of outgroup. Stereotypes can become ingrained and persist beyond conflict. 4. Conflict can be reduced by increasing contact and providing common goals which require cooperation between groups (‘superordinate’ goals). 18 Realist Group Conflict Theory - ‘Classic’ theory in Behavioral Sciences Intergroup conflict and the development of prejudice, discrimination and violence, result from competition between groups (e.g., tribes, countries, regions, ethnic groups) for limited resources (water, fertile land, oil and mineral reserves, jobs/money). 19 Do incompatible ”Not only are incompatible group interests not always sufficient to generate conflict… there is a good deal of experimental evidence that these goals always conditions are not always necessary for the development of competition and discrimination between groups” lead to conflict? (Tajfel & Turner, 2004: 373) Are incompatible Social Identity Theory goals necessary (Emerged as a movement away form RCT as an explanation of integroup conflict. for conflict? 20 Social Identity Theory Proposed by Henry Tajfel and John Turner in 1979. Intergroup conflict and competition relates to social identity and self esteem Social identity: ”That part of the individual’s self concept which derives from his [sic] knowledge of his membership of a social group (or groups), together with the value and emotional significance of that membership” (Tajfel, 1981: 255) Self esteem: Our positive and negative evaluations of ourselves (see week 4!) 21 Social identity theory Three assumptions (Tajfel and Turner 2004: 377) 1. “Individuals strive to maintain or enhance their self-esteem: they strive for a positive self-concept.” 2. “Social groups or categories and the memberships of them are associated with positive or negative value connotations.” 3. “The evaluation of one’s own group is determined with reference to specific other groups through social comparisons in terms of value-laden attributes and characteristics.” 22  Social identity theory Three Principles (Tajfel and Turner 2004: 378) Based on the three assumptions (previous slide)… 1. “Individuals strive to achieve and maintain positive social identity” 2. “Positive social identity is based on a large extent on favourable comparisons that can be made between the in-group and some relevant out-groups” 3. “When social identity is unsatisfactory, individuals will strive to leave their existing group and join some more positively distinct group and/or to make their existing group more positively distinct” 23  Social identity theory What does this all mean? We want to feel good about themselves. Whether or not we feel good about ourselves largely depends on whether the groups we are part of (in-groups) are viewed positively or negatively compared to other groups (out-groups). If our group is viewed positively compared to other groups, we feel good about ourselves. We differentiate our in-group from out-groups in order to achieve and maintain superiority over other groups. We may discriminate people from out-groups to achieve this. Group conflict and competition can thus arise because individuals want to feel good about themselves (and not necessarily because groups are competing for resources). 24  Social identity theory Minimal Group Paradigm A key concept underpinning SIT: A methodology used in studies to determine the minimal conditions required for discrimination between groups. “The mere awareness of an out-group is sufficient to stimulate in-group favouritism… the possibility of social comparison generates ‘spontaneous’ intergeroup competition” (Tajfel & Turner, 2004:378) 25  Social identity theory Reactions to negative social identity What do we do when our groups are viewed negatively? 1. Individual mobility – individuals move from one group to another (not always possible) 2. Social creativity Reverse the negative value attached to the in-group attribute Emphasize and celebrate another group characteristic which is more favourable Shifting comparison to a different outgroup 3. Social comparison Direct attempt to change the relative positions of the ingroup and the outgroup on the most salient dimensions. 26 We live in a Instances of individual/social mobility, social pluralistic society, creativity, and social competition are constantly occurring as people seek to improve their self- concept. characterized by numerous groups. Social mobility: Reflects flexibility and permeability within society, as individuals move between groups Social change: Reflects inflexibility and rigidity within society. People cannot easily move between groups so they advocate for greater social change. Ø Societies differ (some more rigid than others), but both social mobility and social change can occur side-by-side. 27 Some question Think of your in-groups… What positive aspects of yourself for you! derive from these groups? When have you felt positive/negative because your ingroups have done well (or done badly?) What are some examples of social mobility from your life? 28  Resolving conflict between groups: Part 3 Contact & Acculturation See also: Allport 1954, Pettigrew 1998, Berry 2005 29  Ø Superordinate goals. Diverse groups Contemporary societies are ‘band-together’ to achieve shared heterogenous, with many objectives (RGCT) diverse groups and Another (related) explanation/theory communities. The Intergroup Contact Hypothesis - How can we reduce/avoid (Allport 1954, Pettigrew 1998) conflict? What happens when groups of individuals from different culture come into continuous contact? Berry’s Bidimensional Model of Acculturation 30 Immigration is a key issue here… People in big cities have more positive attitudes towards immigration than people from small towns and rural areas. Big cities are cosmopolitan (diverse, many groups). Rural areas are often homogenous. What explains this phenomenon? From Maxwell, 2019. X axis represents attitudes towards immigration (Further right = more favorable) 31  Intergroup contact can be beneficial when it is under the right conditions: 1. When there is equal status between Intergroup Contact groups Hypothesis 2. When groups have common goals Allport 1954 3. When there is interdependent cooperation 4. Support of authorities, laws and customs. 32 Pettigrew’s reformulation of The Contact Hypothesis Pettigrew 1998 Time is very important! Intergroup contact is a long-term process that can not be replicated in small experiments. Over time, meaningful intergroup relations (e.g. friendships) are developed. The ‘fifth’ condition of The Contact Hypothesis is thus ‘the opportunity to become friends’. “The contact situation must provide participants with the opportunity to become friends. Such opportunity implies close interaction that would make self-disclosure and other friendship- developing mechanisms possible” (Pettigrew 1998: 76) 33 When two cultures come together - Acculturation “Acculturation is the dual process of cultural and psychological change that takes place as a result of contact between two or more cultural groups and their individual members. At the group level, it involves changes in social structures and institutions and in cultural practices. At the individual level, it involves changes in a person’s behavioural repertoire. These cultural and psychological changes come about through a long-term process, sometimes taking years, sometimes generations, and sometimes centuries.” (Berry 2005: 698-699) 34 Berry’s Bidimensional Model of Acculturation Migrants and ethnocultural minority groups face two questions: 1. ‘Do I want to maintain the culture and traditions of my ethnocultural background?’ 2. ‘Do I want to develop and maintain relationships with other groups? (esp. the host community). - ‘Do I want to adopt the culture and traditions of the host/majority group?’ Based on these two questions, the following ‘typology’ of acculturation orientations emerges. 35 Berry’s Bidimensional Model of Acculturation Integration: individuals maintain a positive relation to their original cultural and their host culture Assimilation: Individuals relinquish their original cultural and completely absorb new culture. Separation: Individuals retain their original culture and reject their host culture. Marginalisation: individuals reject both cultures. An ‘integration’ orientation tends to be associated with more positive outcomes. This has been shown in numerous countries (Germany, Spain, USA, Netherlands, Australia etc). 36 The Interactive Acculturation Model Bourhis et al 1997 Argues that the ‘relative fit’, or the compatibility of majority and minority orientations, is important. To what extent do both groups find it acceptable that: Immigrants maintain their cultural heritage Immigrants adopt the culture of the host community Based on the degree of alignment between the two groups, three outcome can emerge: Consensual: groups agree on the way in which they should live together Problematic: groups disagree on one of the points above Conflictual: the groups disagree on both points above, and/or if the dominant group prefers exclusion 37 Summary: Intergroup relations Lots of theory this week! Ø The theories that we have explored today can be used to make sense of social behaviour in subsequent weeks (e.g. online behaviour, leadership) 38  Key points: Summary: Individual behaviour is heavily influenced by intergroup dynamics Intergroup Realistic Group Conflict Theory and Social Identify Theory provide relations explanations for intergroup conflict and competition Conflict and competition between groups can be reduced when particular conditions are met. The relationship between minority ethnocultural groups and host/majority groups can be understood in terms of acculturation orientations 39