Essay
Essay Social Psychology Social Psychology, ISBN: 9780357122846
descriptive essay piece answering the questions based on contact and cooperation strategies used by social psychologists, with included referencing
[Show more]
Connected book
Book Title:
Author(s):
- Edition:
- ISBN:
- Edition:
Content preview
Social Psychology - Essay 1Essay Question:
“Discuss cooperation and contact strategies used by Social Psychologists to improve
intergroup relations.”
Associating intergroup relations means interacting between individuals from different social
groups, as well as interacting between groups themselves. The two main relationships in
intergroup are Contact and cooperation. Having intergroup contact between groups
decreases prejudice. There are, however, many studies that support this conclusion that has
been conducted in societies with low violent intergroup conflict, such as North America and
Europe. In situations where individuals interact with outgroup members, both arousal effects
are likely to be enhanced. Positive emotions can be generated when individuals interact with
outgroup members. Intergroup relationships are also characterized by cooperation.
Cooperation among group members is crucial for the effective functioning of complex
organizations and societies. Intergroup cooperation is still more challenging to realize and
sustain than cooperation among members of the same group or even between parties who
are unfamiliar with one another because it is so tightly woven into intergroup dynamics and
undermined by general intergroup biases. If a group is large, it is better for everyone to take
part in a competition against an outgroup, but at the very least, when the group is big,
everyone should have the ability to defect. In these studies, intergroup cooperation was
expected to develop under circumstances that encourage such cooperation.
Intergroups with a higher level of interactions with an outgroup tend to have fewer negative
perceptions of that outgroup, whereas intergroup with fewer interactions tend to harbour
fewer negative perceptions. Those interested in intergroup conflict have long notched up
lengthy theories. The research on the amelioration of intergroup conflict has originated with
Robin Williams and Gordon Allport over the past several decades, but they also proposed a
series of conditions. Research suggests that these 'positive factors' can facilitate the
reduction of intergroup prejudice in some cases, but they are not necessary. In other words,
all four are conducive to better intergroup relations. Although the contact hypothesis was
formed initially in the context of race and ethnicity relations, it may also be applied to
intergroup-outgroup relations across religions, ages, sexual orientations, health conditions,
and economic factors. It is believed contacting people from minority groups and majority
groups can reduce prejudice between them under certain conditions. Intergroup contact
always leads to conflict, according to Darwinism pioneers such as William Graham Sumner
(1906). It was Sunmer's view that interacting with other groups naturally and inevitably led to
hostility and conflict since most groups believed themselves to be superior. Baker (1934)
argues that interracial contact produces "suspicions, fears, resentments, disturbances, and
wars" (Baker, 1934); others, such as Lett (1945), argue interracial contact fosters "mutual
respect and understanding." (Letti, 1945)". According to Brophy (1936), who was closer to
the later work of Allport, he investigated the black-white relations within the Merchant
Marine, which was almost desegregated. Research shows that, as white sailors engaged in
more voyages with black sailors, their racial attitudes progressively changed.
Aside from those studies, Allport made use of the work of Professors Benard Karmer (1950)
and Barbara MacKenzi (1948), who showed that intergroup contact can reduce and increase
a sense of belonging to an organization. behaviour within a group increases prejudice; and
finally, who adopted, along with Williams (1947) four "positive factors" that contribute to de-
prejudicing group contact. There cannot be an unequal, hierarchical relationship between
groups in contact situations. The perception exists that each group has equal standing under
the circumstances (Riordan and Ruggiero, 1980; Cohen, 1982; Pettigrew and Tropp, 2005).
However, research demonstrated that groups could share equal status even if their initial
status is different (Patchen, 1982; Schofield and Rich-Fulcher, 2001) despite some scholars
emphasizing the need for equal status before and during contact situations (Brewer and
Karmer, 1985; Foster and Finchilescu, 1986). The members of the team must work together
, to accomplish their common objectives. Effective communication requires each member of a
group to actively take part in the pursuit of a common goal. For members of a group to attain
these common goals, Allport (1954) argues that they need to work together cooperatively
rather than competitively. Positive relationships between the groups are fostered by
intergroup cooperation. Cooperation between groups can also be observed in schools. The
"jigsaw" approach was developed by Elliott Aronson, which promotes positive relationships
between students of diverse backgrounds (Aronson, 2002).
As well as supporting accepted standards of behaviour and guidelines for how members of
the groups should interact, authorities, laws, or customs support positive effects of
intergroup contact. Strict segregation laws should not be enforced. Individuals need
interpersonal communication in a wide variety of contexts, including the military (Landis,
Hope, and Day, 1983), religion (Parker, 1968) and business (Morrison and Herlihy, 1992).
To examine intergroup contact and prejudice, the results of a 515 study were analysed via a
meta-analysis five years ago. In total, 250,493 individuals in 38 nations responded to these
surveys during the 1940s to the year 2000. All three levels of analysis typically have lower
prejudice levels when there is higher contact within groups. Stronger contact-prejudice
relationships are found in rigorous research studies than in less rigorous ones, and this
indicates biases in participant selection cannot explain these results. Further, these effects
were generalized, such that contact with individual members of the outgroup reduced
prejudice against that entire group as well. (Pettigrew and Tropp, 2004a). Despite being
acknowledged by researchers, intergroup contact can backfire, particularly when situations
are stressful, negative, or threatening, and the members of one group decide not to
communicate with the members of the other group. The Power of Human, a book written by
psychologist Adam Waytz, said that power dynamics might complicate intergroup contacts,
and reconciliation efforts that include conflicting groups should consider whether there is a
power imbalance between them. For example, he suggested that, when groups are
imbalanced in power, the group with the least power would be able to explain its experiences
better, and the more powerful group might benefit from showing empathy and trying to see
things from the group with the least power's perspective.
Therefore, it has been confirmed that contact plays a significant role in reducing prejudice
since Allport first proposed his contact hypothesis. The effects of positive contact have been
demonstrated repeatedly in numerous studies, such as in those related to black Neighbours,
the elderly, gay men, and persons with disabilities (Voci, 2007; Yuker & Hurley, 187 &Works,
1961; Caspi, 1984; Vonofako, Hewstone). Nonetheless, it was found that even unstructured
contact could reduce prejudices, as measured by a large meta-analysis (Pettigrew & Tropp,
2006). In other words, Allport’s proposed conditions should be viewed more as facilitating
than essential. As a result, the contact hypothesis becomes more plausible because of these
conditions.
Cooperation between groups leads to less discrimination than competition between groups,
as would be expected. Nevertheless, Sheriff has been found to be right about the
effectiveness of ‘superordinate goals’ shared by previously competing groups even in a more
limited war than he originally anticipated. As Tajfel noted in 1981, at the end of Sheriff's
study, when the two groups of boys worked together, they each achieved a common goal
which neither of the two groups could have achieved apart. Therefore, the two groups no
longer competed. For example, there are no valid reasons to assume that the two groups do
not share a sense of belonging to a group and that, as a result, their full cooperation should
not be representative of other situations in which groups retain their separate identities
despite the occasional situations in which they need to join forces. Researchers from
Worchel et al (Worchel et al 1977, 1978) have undertaken an experiment on this topic. In it,
they demonstrated that the salience of previously existing group identities affected the
effects of subsequent intergroup cooperation and that there was also a significant interaction
between them. The relationship between cooperation and several antecedents and
outcomes has been described in greater detail in recent years. Cooperation’s, coordination,
and performance were examined by Beer, Eisenstat, and Spector (1990) who showed that
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller zehrasglm. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £10.39. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
80467 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now
