Week 5 - Group membership
- Created by: Shannon
- Created on: 18-02-16 14:00
View mindmap
- Week 5 - Group membership
- Intergroup relations
- Sherif's definition on revision sheet
- Realistic conflict approach - RTC
- The nature of relationships between groups depends on the compatibility of their goals
- Conflict = competition over resources or goals - only one can achieve
- Harmony = Cooperation in pursuit of a common superordinate goal
- Summer camp study
- First study in Connecticut, 1949
- 11-12 y/o white boys
- Test of conflict between groups is caused by competition over resources or goals that only one can achieve
- Three stages of research
- No intervention
- Group formation
- Intergroup competition
- Group formation
- Findings
- Rise in hostility due to compeition
- No intervention
- Three stages of research
- Test of conflict between groups is caused by competition over resources or goals that only one can achieve
- 11-12 y/o white boys
- First study in Connecticut, 1949
- The nature of relationships between groups depends on the compatibility of their goals
- Realistic conflict approach - RTC
- In group - the group we belong to
- Outgroups - the other groups
- Sherif's definition on revision sheet
- Robbers Cave Study - 1954
- Group formation
- Competition
- Boys overestimate ingroup performace compared to out group
- Group serving attributes
- win = fast runners, lose = out group are cheats
- Group serving attributes
- Conflict resolution
- The idea that social hostility can be lessesned by increasing positive interpersonal contact between group members = no effect
- Establish Subordinate goals
- A goal with appeal for members of each group that neither group can achieve without the other
- Results in cooperation and less intergroup hostility
- At the end of camp, both groups requested that they go home together on the same bus
- A goal with appeal for members of each group that neither group can achieve without the other
- Boys overestimate ingroup performace compared to out group
- Competition
- Group formation
- Taifel's SIT of intergroup relations
- Minimal group experiments
- Designed to construct groups that exist in name and imagination only
- Group member have no relational affiliation
- Boys from Bristol Grammar School
- Mere categorization effect
- Even when we don't know the other group and have nothing to gain simply being a member of a group leads to
- In group favouratism
- Adoption of competitive orientation to outgroups
- In group favouratism
- Social Identity theory is an explanation for this
- Knowing they belong to a group due to emotional and value significance
- Even when we don't know the other group and have nothing to gain simply being a member of a group leads to
- Mere categorization effect
- Boys from Bristol Grammar School
- Group member have no relational affiliation
- Designed to construct groups that exist in name and imagination only
- Motive for positive distinctiveness
- View group we identigy with as both different and better than outgroups
- Social group based identity = situationally flexible
- Different aspects of our identity become salient or relevant in different situations
- Sailient when we regulate our behaviour according to the norms associated with the group
- Different aspects of our identity become salient or relevant in different situations
- Social group based identity = situationally flexible
- View group we identigy with as both different and better than outgroups
- Minimal group experiments
- The dark sides to social identity
- Negative stereotyping and discrimination
- The need to establish positive distinctiveness = social conflict
- View group we identigy with as both different and better than outgroups
- Social group based identity = situationally flexible
- Different aspects of our identity become salient or relevant in different situations
- Sailient when we regulate our behaviour according to the norms associated with the group
- Different aspects of our identity become salient or relevant in different situations
- Social group based identity = situationally flexible
- Reicher and Haslam
- 5 step process that leads to the development of COLLECTIVE HATE
- 1. Group identification
- 2. Differentiation from an other
- 3. Threat
- 4. Identify the ingroup virtue
- 5. Celebration of hostility
- Ingroup = positive virtue
- Outgroup = oppposite
- Outgroup = threat
- 4. Identify the ingroup virtue
- Ingroup solidarity and community
- Exclude outgroup
- 3. Threat
- Collective realization
- Only our true selves when part of the group
- 2. Differentiation from an other
- 1. Group identification
- 5 step process that leads to the development of COLLECTIVE HATE
- View group we identigy with as both different and better than outgroups
- The need to establish positive distinctiveness = social conflict
- Negative stereotyping and discrimination
- Positive aspects of social identity
- sense of belonging
- Exhilarating and empowering
- Promotes collective resistance to stigmatization and discrimination
- Exhilarating and empowering
- Promotes collective resillience in situations of extreme adversity
- sense of belonging
- Social creativity
- Situation in which members of low status groups act collectively to challenge derogatory stereotypes
- Intergroup relations
Similar Psychology resources:
Teacher recommended
Comments
No comments have yet been made