Psychological theories of intergroup relations

SIGNIFICANCE: Theories of intergroup relations examine the processes that underlie relationships between individuals belonging to different groups; these theories provide insights into conflict, ethnocentrism, self-esteem, and leadership.

The major psychological theories of intergroup relations include Freudian theory, equity theory, relative deprivation theory, social identity theory, realistic conflict theory, and the “five-stage model” of intergroup relations. The three theories listed first are the most “reductionist” in that they attempt to reduce intergroup relations to the level of intra- and interpersonal processes. In contrast, social identity theory, realistic conflict theory, and the five-stage model provide explanations at the level of intergroup processes.

Freud’s Influence

Although Sigmund Freud did not develop a formal theory of intergroup relations, his writings on hostility and aggression have had a historical influence on most major intergroup theories. Freud presented an irrationalist account of group processes, arguing that conflict arises out of the irrational feelings and emotional needs of in-group members, rather than as a result of differences between the material interests of groups.

Freud proposed that feelings of love and aversion are involved in emotional ties between individuals. Group members are bound together by the ties of love that link them all with the group leader. The corresponding feelings of hate do not disappear, but are displaced into out-groups. Freud believed that it is possible for ties of love to bind a number of people together as long as there are some other people left over onto whom hatred can be displaced. The most likely targets for such displaced aggression would be out-groups that are dissimilar.

Thus, for Freud, the key to understanding relations between groups lies in the nature of relations within groups, particularly between group members and the leader. Freud believed that the only groups worth considering are those with leaders because, without leadership, the group cannot be cohesive and effective.

Equity Theory

Equity theory is also reductionist in its account of intergroup relations, but, in contrast to the Freudian model, equity theory presents a picture of humans as rational beings. The main focus of equity theory is relations between individuals, but it also has implications for intergroup relations. The starting premise is that individuals strive to maximize rewards for themselves, but this “selfishness” is pursued within the norms of justice prevalent in society.

Individuals are assumed to feel distressed when they do not achieve justice in their relationships. Justice is achieved when the ratio of a person’s inputs and outcomes is equal to that of the other person in the relationship. When this ratio is not equal, justice can be restored by adjusting the inputs and outcomes, either psychologically or in practice, to arrive at equity.

What makes equity theory a psychological theory rather than simply a model of economic exchange is that it is perceived justice that is assumed to determine relations between group members. For example, the relations between a minority and majority group may, in actual practice, be very unequal, but the ratio of inputs and outcomes for the two groups may be seen as equitable by both groups; this perceived equality is what determines behavior.

Relative Deprivation Theory

Similar in its emphasis on purely psychological determinants of relations between groups is relative deprivation theory. This theory focuses on the conditions associated with feelings of discontent among disadvantaged individuals and, by implication, groups. Feelings of satisfaction are not assumed to be primarily determined by objective conditions, but rather by one’s perceptions of one’s own situation relative to that of others. Theorists disagree about the exact conditions required in order for relative deprivation to be experienced; however, two generally accepted preconditions for feelings of discontent are that individuals must, first, feel they deserve to attain a better situation and, second, believe it possible to do so.

Social Identity Theory

A major European theory that has inspired much research since the 1970s is the social identity theory. This theory focuses on groups with unequal power and predicts the conditions in which people will feel motivated, individually or collectively, to maintain or change their group membership or the relations between their in-group and the out-groups. Social identity theory assumes that individuals are motivated to achieve and maintain a positive and distinct social identity. Specifically, this means that individuals will want to be members of groups that enjoy high status and are distinct in some important ways.

Social comparisons between the in-group and out-groups allow individuals to determine the extent to which the in-group provides them with a satisfactory social identity. In conditions in which the social identity of individuals is unsatisfactory and “cognitive” alternatives to the present intergroup situation are perceived, individual or collective forms of action will be taken toward achieving a satisfactory social identity. These actions range from redefining an in-group characteristic, as suggested by the slogan “Black is beautiful,” to direct intergroup confrontation. When cognitive alternatives are not perceived, disadvantaged group members may attempt to improve their social identity by individual mobility, or by simply comparing themselves with other members of the in-group and avoiding comparisons with members of higher-status groups.

The Five-Stage Model

The five-stage model of intergroup relations focuses on how disadvantaged and, to a lesser extent, advantaged group members cope with inequality. It assumes that all intergroup relations pass through the same developmental stages in the same sequential manner. During stage one, group stratification is based on rigid categories such as sex or gender. In stage two, there emerges the concept that individual effort and ability can determine group membership. It is assumed that upward social mobility will be attempted by members of the disadvantaged group, first on an individual basis, and this takes place at stage three. When individual mobility is blocked, however, during stage four, talented members of the disadvantaged group will engage in “consciousness raising” in order to try to mobilize the disadvantaged group as a collectivity. At stage five, if the challenge made by the disadvantaged group is successful and the two groups become fairly equal, there will be a healthy state of intergroup competition. If inequality persists, however, then the process of intergroup evolution begins again at an earlier stage in the five-stage cycle.

Realistic Conflict Theory

A rational and materialistic picture of intergroup relations is offered by realistic conflict theory, which addresses how conflicts arise between groups of fairly equal power, the course they take, and their resolution. At a first step, group cohesion and identity evolve as people cooperate in working toward shared goals. Intergroup conflict arises when groups interact and compete for scarce resources, such as territory or status. Conflict can be turned into peace, however, through the adoption of “superordinate goals.” An example would be an environmentally safe world, a goal that is beneficial to all humankind but that cannot be achieved without the cooperation of all societies.

Other Theories

The similarity-attraction hypothesis and the contact hypothesis are not major theories, but they should be mentioned in any discussion of intergroup theories. The assumption that similarity leads to attraction and, by implication, that dissimilarity leads to dislike underlies several of the major theories. The contact hypothesis, developed by American psychologist Gordon Allport, assumes that under certain conditions, liking increases as a result of increased contact between people. Other theories applicable to the study of intergroups relations include system justification, the social dominance theory, and the minimal group paradigm.

The Study of Intergroup Theories

Intergroup theories constitute a subdiscipline of social psychology. Historically, intergroup relations were a relatively neglected topic in social psychology because the study has tended to be reductionist—seeking to explain all social behavior by focusing on processes within and between individuals rather than within and between groups. The personal histories of researchers have been essential factors in the development of intergroup theories. For example, many of the major theories were initiated by researchers who were outsiders themselves with firsthand experience of prejudice. These include Freud, a Jew who lived in Vienna, Austria, most of his life and had to flee to escape the invading Nazis at the start of World War II. Muzafer Sherif, who developed the social judgment theory and realistic conflict theory, was a Turkish man who moved to the United States after experiencing political problems in his home country. The Polish psychologist who identified the cognitive aspects of prejudice, Henri Tajfel, was a Jewish refugee who found a home in England after World War II.

Research on intergroup relations has also been influenced in important ways by minority movements such as the “ethnic revival” and the women’s liberation movement. As early as the 1940s, African American psychologists highlighted the negative impact of prejudice on African American children. Later, the Black Power movement and the revival of ethnicity generally led to a greater focus on psychological research in the treatment of ethnic minorities. Similarly, beginning in the 1960s, society placed greater emphasis on women’s issues, which led to more emphasis on minority-majority relations. For example, the issue of how the majority influences the minority, a major topic in mainstream research, has evolved to become “how the minority influences the majority.”

Intergroup theories should also be considered in the context of superpower conflicts. From the 1940s until the late 1980s, the United States and the Soviet Union were considered superpowers of fairly equal military strength. Not surprisingly, much of the research and several of the major intergroup theories, such as realistic conflict theory, dealt with competing parties of equal strength. The focus on unequal parties came with the more recent theories, particularly social identity theory, developed in the 1970s, and the five-stage model, developed in the 1980s.

Intergroup relations began receiving more attention from psychologists and gained a more prominent role in mainstream research in the early twenty-first century. This trend emerged in part, as a result of the changing demographic characteristics of North American society. Many scientists began focusing on the impact of systemic racism, ways to identify it, and ways to measure its impact on society. For example, Stanford University professor Dr. Jennifer Eberhardt has demonstrated the other-race effect in her research on race ethnicity and crime. Her studies have focused on bias in stereotypes and the implicit bias in the American criminal justice system. Her work is explained in her 2019 book, Biased: Uncovering the Hidden Prejudice That Shapes What We See, Think, and Do. She also helped found Stanford University’s Center for Social Psychological Answers to Real-World Questions, with social psychologist Nalini Ambady. This organization aims to translate research findings on societal issues into actionable, applicable solutions to community problems.

Research concerning relationships between and within groups has important applications for lawmakers, businesses, family dynamics, personal growth, and more. As research expands in this area in the twenty-first century, interactions are analyzed using advanced technology, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging, which gives findings a scientific, rather than a theoretical, basis.

Bibliography

Böhm, Robert, et al. “The Psychology of Intergroup Conflict: A Review of Theories and Measures.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, vol. 178, 2020, pp. 947–62, doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2018.01.020. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.

Doise, Willem. Groups and Individuals: Explanations in Social Psychology. Cambridge UP, 1978.

Figueiredo, Ana, et al. “Theories on Intergroup Relations and Emotions: A Theoretical Overview.” Phychologica, vol. 2, 2020, doi.org/10.14195/1647-8606‗57-2‗1. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.

Katz, Phyliss A., and Dalmas A. Taylor. Eliminating Racism: Profiles in Controversy. Plenum, 1988.

Livingston, Robert W., et al. Social Cognition, Social Identity, and Intergroup Relations: A Festschrift in Honor of Marilynn B. Brewer. Taylor, 2011.

Pilat, Dan, and Sekoul Krastev. "Dr. Jennifer Eberhardt." The Decision Lab, thedecisionlab.com/thinkers/psychology/dr-jennifer-eberhardt. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.

"Social Psychological Answers to Real-World Questions." Stanford University, diversityworks.stanford.edu/social-psychological-answers-real-world-questions. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.

Taylor, Donald M., and Fathali M. Moghaddam. Theories of Intergroup Relations: International Social Psychological Perspectives. Praeger, 1987.

Worchel, Stephen, and William G. Austin, editors. Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Nelson, 1986.