Reducing intergroup conflict: From superordinate goals to decategorization, recategorization, and mutual differentiation.

2000 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel L. Gaertner ◽  
John F. Dovidio ◽  
Brenda S. Banker ◽  
Missy Houlette ◽  
Kelly M. Johnson ◽  
...  
1978 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 735-741 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lutfy N. Diab

The effectiveness of measures used to produce social change in real-life situations can be evaluated in terms of three sets of interacting and related factors: (1) the kinds of group relations involved, i.e., positive or negative, (2) the relative differential socio-economic power of the cooperating or conflicting groups, i.e., dominant or subordinate, and (3) the nature of social change involved, i.e., whether or not it implies a significant and qualitative change in the prevailing status quo. The major thesis of this paper is that the precondition for applying any measure to combat prejudice and discrimination is the preexistence of intergroup conflict perceived by the dominant groups as constituting a major threat, actual or potential, to the prevailing status quo. Superordinate goals produced by intergroup conflict are presented as a necessary prerequisite for the subsequent effective implementation of measures used to reduce intergroup conflict and hostility.


Author(s):  
Yair Amichai-Hamburger ◽  
Shir Etgar

People tend to divide the world into categories. One of them is the group of people I belong to (the ingroup) and the group I do not belong to (the outgroup). People have a tendency to stereotype the outgroup and behave toward it with prejudice and discrimination. In many cases these forms of behavior lead to intergroup conflict. One of the major proposals for resolving this situation was suggested by Gordon W. Allport and is called the Contact Hypothesis. According to this model, when a contact between the groups is held under certain conditions—equal status, institutional support, and cooperation between the rival groups toward the achievement of superordinate goals—people are likely to change their negative perception of the outgroup and improve their relationship with its members. Despite the success of the model, it has been shown to suffer from three major obstacles. First, it is logistically complicated to achieve the requisite conditions; secondly, the physical proximity to the rival group’s members is likely to cause high anxiety among participants, which may well prevent any positive change; thirdly, the contact, even if successful, is unlikely to be generalized to the groups as a whole. Online intergroup contact appears to overcome these challenges.


1983 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 189-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Claude Deschamps ◽  
Rupert Brown

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Buckner ◽  
Luke Glowacki

Abstract De Dreu and Gross predict that attackers will have more difficulty winning conflicts than defenders. As their analysis is presumed to capture the dynamics of decentralized conflict, we consider how their framework compares with ethnographic evidence from small-scale societies, as well as chimpanzee patterns of intergroup conflict. In these contexts, attackers have significantly more success in conflict than predicted by De Dreu and Gross's model. We discuss the possible reasons for this disparity.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda R. Ridley ◽  
Melanie O. Mirville

Abstract There is a large body of research on conflict in nonhuman animal groups that measures the costs and benefits of intergroup conflict, and we suggest that much of this evidence is missing from De Dreu and Gross's interesting article. It is a shame this work has been missed, because it provides evidence for interesting ideas put forward in the article.


2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Winnifred R. Louis ◽  
Joanne R. Smith ◽  
Kathleen D. Vohs

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document