Lecture 7 Flashcards
(34 cards)
What is Realistic Conflict Theory?
Realistic Conflict Theory (RCT)
Intergroup conflict arises from competition for limited or exclusive resources (e.g., jobs, power, land).
Competition fosters ethnocentrism, leading to in-group favoritism and out-group hostility.
Proposed by Muzafer Sherif, this theory emphasizes the role of group dynamics over individual traits in creating conflict.
What is ethnocentrism?
A tendency to view one’s in-group as superior and evaluate out-groups by in-group standards.
Manifestations include stereotyping, mistrust, and hostility toward out-groups.
Ethnocentrism is exacerbated by competition and group polarization.
What is Sherif’s Summer Camp Experiement?
Phase 1: Boys formed friendships freely.
Phase 2: Divided into groups (Eagles and Rattlers), with no cross-group interaction.
Phase 3: Competitive activities led to hostility, including name-calling and raiding camps.
Phase 4: Cooperation on superordinate goals (e.g., pulling a stuck truck) reduced but did not eliminate hostility.
What were the findings from Sherif’s experiment?
Competition creates intergroup conflict.
Superordinate goals requiring mutual dependence can mitigate hostility.
Leaders often emerge based on athletic prowess or their ability to antagonize rival groups.
Limitations of Realistic Conflict Theory (RCT)
Conflict Without Competition: Doesn’t explain bias from mere group categorization.
Lingering Bias: Cooperation reduces but doesn’t eliminate hostility.
Ignores Perceptions: Overlooks conflicts based on symbolic or perceived threats.
Lacks Context: Fails to address historical and social influences on intergroup dynamics.
What is the Minimal Group Paradigm (MGP)?
An experimental setup showing that even trivial group divisions lead to in-group favoritism.
Groups formed on meaningless criteria, such as preference for abstract paintings or dot-counting tasks.
No interaction or personal stakes needed to trigger bias.
Minimal Group Paradigm - Key Results
Minimal Group Paradigm - Key Results
Participants allocated more resources to their in-group, even when there was no tangible benefit.
Bias emerged purely from group categorization, independent of competition.
Demonstrates that categorization alone is sufficient for intergroup bias.
Comparing RCT and MGP
RCT: Conflict is driven by competition over scarce resources.
MGP: Bias arises from group categorization, even without competition or material stakes.
Together, these theories show different pathways to intergroup conflict.
What are the Implications of the Minimal Group Paradigm?
Highlights the psychological basis of intergroup bias through social identity.
Supports Social Identity Theory, where positive self-esteem is derived from group membership.
Shows how subtle factors can influence behavior and decision-making in group contexts.
Limitations of Minimal Group Paradigm (MGP)
Artificial Setting: Simplistic and far removed from real-world group dynamics.
Demand Characteristics: Participants may behave as expected by researchers.
No Real Stakes: Outcomes lack tangible consequences, reducing ecological validity.
What is Social Identity Theory (SIT)?
Definition: SIT explains how group membership shapes self-esteem and perceptions of others.
Key Idea: People derive part of their self-esteem from group membership, motivating in-group favoritism and out-group bias.
Group Membership and Bias
SIT adds a motivational element to explain why we favor our in-group.
Minimal Group Paradigm shows “us vs. them” categorization, but SIT explains favoritism as a way to enhance self-esteem.
Key Mechanisms in SIT
Self-Categorization: People define themselves by group memberships.
Prototypes: Groups are represented by ideal characteristics that distinguish them from others.
Depersonalization: Individuals see themselves and others as representatives of their group, not as unique individuals.
Livingstone, Young & Manstead (2011)
Participants: University students.
Findings: Alcohol consumption was a defining aspect of group identity.
In-group norms about alcohol consumption (moderate vs. high) were manipulated.
Students’ drinking intentions aligned with these norms.
Conclusion: Behavior is strongly influenced by in-group norms, especially when identity is salient.
Livingstone & Haslam (2008)
Participants: Adolescents in Northern Ireland (Catholics and Protestants).
Measures: In-group identification, intergroup antagonism, and intentions toward out-groups.
Findings:
High intergroup antagonism + strong in-group identification = less favorable intentions toward out-groups.
Conclusion: In-group identification can intensify hostility in conflict situations.
Accessibility and Fit in SIT
Accessibility: Likelihood of a social identity being activated based on relevance.
Fit: A social identity is activated when it matches the social context and highlights differences between groups.
Depersonalization Effects
Positive: Promotes group cohesion and conformity.
Negative: Can lead to:
Accentuation Effect: Overestimating similarities within groups.
Relative Homogeneity Effect: Viewing out-group members as more uniform.
Social Categorization Theory Overview
Definition: A cognitive theory that explains how individuals classify themselves and others into groups based on context and social identities.
Purpose: To extend understanding of Social Identity Theory (SIT) by focusing on how group members relate to each other and how self-categorization
influences behavior.
Levels of Categorization
Individuals categorize themselves and others at different levels:
Broadly: As human beings.
Group Membership: Representative of a specific group.
Individually: As unique individuals.
Relationship Between Social Categorization Theory and SIT
SCT and SIT are often grouped as the “social identity approach.”
SCT complements SIT by addressing the cognitive mechanisms of categorization, whereas SIT focuses on motivations like enhancing self-esteem.
Prototypes in SCT
Definition: Prototypes are sets of ideal attributes that define a group and distinguish it from others.
Key Idea: Prototypes are subjective and can change based on context and salience.
Factors Influencing Identity Activation
Accessibility:
A social identity is more likely activated if it is chronically accessible or contextually relevant.
Fit:
A social category becomes salient if it matches the social reality and highlights differences between groups.
Meta-Contrast Principle
Definition: Social identities become salient when they:
Maximize differences with out-groups.
Minimize differences within the in-group.
Depersonalisation
Definition: Viewing oneself and others as interchangeable exemplars of the group prototype, not as unique individuals.
Effects: Explains group processes such as:
Cohesion
Conformity
Social influence
Note: Depersonalization is distinct from dehumanization but can lead to it when stereotypes deny out-group members’ humanity.
