Q3L08 - Origins (Social)


Published on

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Q3L08 - Origins (Social)

  1. 1. Realistic Conflict Theory and Sherif’s Robber’s Cave<br />Sherif (1966)<br />•Proposed a realistic conflict theory of intergroup behaviour in terms of the nature of goal relations between groups.<br />•Argued that individuals with mutually exclusive goals (e.g. a scarce resource that only one can obtain) engage in interindividual competition collapse of an existing group and prevents group formation.<br />•E.g. Cronulla beach as the resource to obtain<br />•Brewer and Campbell (1976) surveyed 30 African tribal groups and found greater derogation of tribal outgroups that lived close by and therefore more likely to be direct competitors for scarce resources (i.e. water and land)<br />Robbers Cave<br />•Phase 1 – In-Group Formation: Two groups of boys transported to camp separated. Form friendships. Unaware of the other group. Each had a group name (Rattlers vs Eagles)<br />•Phase 2 – Friction: Two groups brought together in intergroup competitions. Produced hostility, competition. Ethnocentrisms amplified with intergroup aggression and ingroup solidarity.<br />•Phase 3 – Integration: Bringing the two groups together through superordinate goals.<br />Criticism<br />•Questions over the validity of the Robber’s Cave study:<br />–Unrepresentative samples (US American boys; limited numbers)<br />–Contrived & artificial situation<br />•Competition does not always create prejudice (e.g. Tyerman & Spencer’s study with UK scouts)<br />•The short-term nature of the groups established in camp studies does not address long-term intergroup conflicts.<br />Social Identity Theory<br />•Prejudice is caused by social processes occurring between groups of people<br />•It happens because of the way our sense of self (identity) is determined by the groups we belong to<br />•We derive our identity in part from the social groups we belong to (culture, religion, profession, football team…)<br />–Consequently, we feel better about ourselves when we feel good about our social groups<br />–We get to feel good about our social groups by comparing them favourably with other groups<br />•Prejudice is a strategy for achieving & maintaining self-esteem:<br />–We will tend to be biased towards in-group members and against out-group members<br />–We will pay more attention to criteria that make our in-groups look better than salient out-groups<br />•Favouritism towards in-group:<br />•Levine et al (2005) – Man-U & Liverpool fans more likely to help an injured person if wearing own team’s colours<br />•Football fans – self-esteem linked to team performance; tendency to criticise other teams/fans (esp. if local); tendency to emphasise other ways of being superior if team doing poorly (e.g. ‘Chelsea fans are glory hunters, not real fans’ etc.)<br />Criticism<br />•Most studies show bias towards in-group – not necessarily the same thing as prejudice<br />Social Learning Theory<br />•Acquiring negative attitudes toward various social groups through direct and vicarious learning experiences<br />•Parents, teachers, friends, the mass media all play roles in the development of prejudice<br />•Consider how minority groups or the two genders have been portrayed in the media<br />Applied summary:<br />I was at a local pub where I had a rainbow flag logo on the side of my arm on my shirt. An English guy came out from the side and punched me in the head and called me a faggot. He threw his beer on me and then shoved me to the ground - my best friend was a few chairs away and stepped in and punched him in the stomach. The guy then backhanded my best friend in the side of his head. We walked away as security was just staring at us and told us it was best we leave as we were causing “controversy”. I live in a low income suburb so I know that this is a major factor in this guys behaviour! (Ricardo, 21 years)<br />THEORYEXPLANATION OF ORIGINMere ExposureEnglish guy has not been in contact with many LGBTI and therefore does not find the group as likable Scapegoat TheoryEnglish guy displaced frustration-aggression to his perception of a weaker groupAuthoritarian PersonalityEnglish guy has biologically inherited an authoritarian personality and is rigid and aggressive in his viewsSocial Dominance TheoryEnglish guy is high on social dominance orientationBelief CongruenceEnglish guy has dissimilar beliefs = dislike and prejudiceRealistic conflict theoryEnglish guy competing for the pub as the scarce resourceSocial Identity TheoryEnglish guy believes he is maintaining his self-esteem and identity to his in-group by attacking members of the outgroupSocial Learning TheoryEnglish guy is copying the behaviours of various agents of socialisation – peers, media, parents, etc<br />