Understanding Intergroup Relations: Theories and Perspectives

Individualistic Approaches to Intergroup Relations

Scapegoat Theory

According to Dollard, frustration is a necessary and sufficient condition for aggressive behavior. When individuals cannot direct aggression towards its true cause, they may displace it onto alternative targets (scapegoats).

Berkowitz suggests that aversive events, rather than just frustration, contribute to aggression.

Authoritarian Personality Theory

Adorno proposes that prejudice against outgroups stems from a personality configuration that integrates cognitive and motivational components. This theory suggests that attitudes reflect deep-seated personality tendencies rooted in psychoanalytic principles.

Social Learning Theory

This theory posits that aggression is learned through direct or indirect experience. Individuals learn which groups are targets of aggression, which actions are retaliatory, and the appropriate contexts for these behaviors.

Capozza and Volpato highlight limitations of these individualistic theories. For instance, the Authoritarian Personality Theory doesn’t explain the fluctuating prevalence of prejudice across different historical periods and social contexts. Similarly, the Scapegoat Theory doesn’t clarify why specific outgroups are uniformly chosen as targets of aggression. While Social Learning Theory explains the acquisition and reproduction of stereotypes, it doesn’t explain their origins or potential for change.

Focus on Group Dynamics

Realistic Conflict Theory

Campbell suggests that intergroup attitudes and behaviors reflect group interests. When these interests are incompatible, and one group benefits at the expense of another, negative responses such as prejudice and hostility are likely. Conversely, compatible objectives foster positive interactions like tolerance and friendship.

Game Theory

This theory explores how individuals or groups, motivated by competition or mixed motives (cooperation and competition), make decisions. The Prisoner’s Dilemma (Axelrod) exemplifies this, demonstrating how individuals often choose competition even when it leads to negative outcomes for all parties. Cooperation requires repeated interaction and the understanding of future encounters.

Social Identity and Intergroup Relations

Tajfel’s Social Identity Theory

The Minimal Group Paradigm (Tajfel) demonstrates that mere categorization of individuals into artificial groups, without any real interdependence, can lead to social competition, ingroup favoritism, and outgroup bias. This theory emphasizes the interplay of categorization, comparison, and social identity.

Self-Categorization Theory

This theory posits that identity is linked to an individual’s knowledge of belonging to specific social groups. People strive for a positive self-concept, often derived from group membership, leading them to seek affiliation with socially valued groups.

Self-Esteem and Intergroup Relations

Two perspectives explore the role of self-esteem in intergroup discrimination:

  1. Discrimination as a means to enhance self-esteem.
  2. Low self-esteem as a cause of intergroup discrimination.

Research suggests that personal and collective self-esteem have distinct relationships with intergroup discrimination. Long, Spears, and Manstead found that individuals with high self-esteem exhibited greater ingroup favoritism, challenging the notion that discrimination compensates for low self-esteem.

Group Identification and Ingroup Bias

While a positive correlation between group identification and ingroup bias is expected, it remains unstable. When comparisons with the outgroup are negative, individuals may respond in different ways:

  • No perceived alternatives: Social mobility or interpersonal comparison.
  • Perceived alternatives: Social creativity, attribute redefinition, or social competition.

Status, Permeability, and Stability

High-status groups often display greater ingroup bias in areas like competence and creativity. However, low-status groups may exhibit stronger bias in aspects like friendship and cooperation. Permeability, the perceived ability to leave a group, influences behavior. In highly permeable groups, low-status members may dissent, while high-status members reaffirm their commitment. Stability of status differences also plays a role. When perceived as unstable and illegitimate, low-status group members may exhibit greater identity and ingroup bias.

Equity Theory and Relative Deprivation

Equity Theory

This theory suggests that the ratio between contributions and outcomes should be equivalent across groups. Perceived injustices lead to discomfort and discontent, prompting individuals to seek adjustments to restore equity.

Relative Deprivation Theory

This theory proposes that protests are more likely when disadvantaged group members perceive a discrepancy between their current situation and what they believe they deserve, based on comparisons with their past or other groups.

Strategies for Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination

Allport suggests that prejudice stems from ignorance, advocating for mutual understanding as a solution.

Realistic Conflict Theory proposes the establishment of superordinate goals to foster cooperation.

Game Theory emphasizes the importance of mutual trust and negotiation in promoting positive intergroup relations.