DOCSLIB.ORG

Perspective—A New Look at Conflict Management in Work Groups

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Perspective—A New Look at Conflict Management in Work Groups This article was downloaded by: [128.91.90.188] On: 10 May 2017, At: 08:28 Publisher: Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS) INFORMS is located in Maryland, USA Organization Science Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://pubsonline.informs.org Perspective—A New Look at Conflict Management in Work Groups Andrew M. Carton, Basima A. Tewfik To cite this article: Andrew M. Carton, Basima A. Tewfik (2016) Perspective—A New Look at Conflict Management in Work Groups. Organization Science 27(5):1125-1141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2016.1085 Full terms and conditions of use: http://pubsonline.informs.org/page/terms-and-conditions This article may be used only for the purposes of research, teaching, and/or private study. Commercial use or systematic downloading (by robots or other automatic processes) is prohibited without explicit Publisher approval, unless otherwise noted. For more information, contact [email protected]. The Publisher does not warrant or guarantee the article’s accuracy, completeness, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or non-infringement. Descriptions of, or references to, products or publications, or inclusion of an advertisement in this article, neither constitutes nor implies a guarantee, endorsement, or support of claims made of that product, publication, or service. Copyright © 2016, INFORMS Please scroll down for article—it is on subsequent pages INFORMS is the largest professional society in the world for professionals in the fields of operations research, management science, and analytics. For more information on INFORMS, its publications, membership, or meetings visit http://www.informs.org Organization Science Vol. 27, No. 5, September–October 2016, pp. 1125–1141 ISSN 1047-7039 (print) ISSN 1526-5455 (online) http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2016.1085 © 2016 INFORMS A New Look at Conflict Management in Work Groups Andrew M. Carton, Basima A. Tewfik Management Department, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104 {[email protected], btewfi[email protected]} embers of work groups are highly interdependent and often share incompatible values, objectives, and opinions. MAs a result, conflict frequently arises. Given the profound impact of conflict on group effectiveness, scholars have sought to identify strategies that can mitigate its downsides and leverage its upsides. Yet research on conflict management strategies has accumulated inconsistent results. In this Perspectives piece, we argue that these inconsistent findings can be resolved if scholars take a more expansive view of the consequences of conflict management strategies: whereas existing research considers how individual strategies influence a single group conflict type (relational, status, process, or task), we consider the impact of individual strategies on all four conflict types. After building a typology by organizing strategies according to the conflict type that each is best equipped to manage, we argue that the strategies most appropriate for managing one type of conflict may systematically backfire by escalating other conflict types. For example, the adoption of a superordinate identity is likely to resolve relational conflict, yet exacerbate status conflict. In addition to uncovering these instances of “negative spillovers,” we shed light on the rarer phenomena of “positive spillovers,” which occur when conflict management strategies resolve conflict types they were not originally designed to influence. By highlighting how individual conflict management strategies influence multiple conflict types—often in contrasting ways—this Perspectives article reconciles conflicting findings and redirects the literature by providing scholars with new recommendations on how to study conflict management in work groups. Keywords: conflict management; diversity; group conflict; group processes and performance; process conflict; relational conflict; status conflict; task conflict; work teams History: Published online in Articles in Advance October 4, 2016. Introduction indicative of its importance is that conflict management Members of work groups are highly interdependent, represents a core obligation even for those who do not operate within tightly coupled social systems, and fre- specialize in it. To illustrate, Mintzberg (1971) observed quently have incompatible aims. As such, conflict often that 30% of the responsibilities of managers involve arises. Work group members conflict in their relation- resolving conflict. As a consequence of its timeless and ships, their claims to status, their beliefs about how essential role, conflict management constitutes a signif- responsibilities should be allocated, and their approaches icant area of study in research on work groups (Behfar to solving problems (Weingart et al. 2015). Given that et al. 2008, Greer et al. 2008). Downloaded from informs.org by [128.91.90.188] on 10 May 2017, at 08:28 . For personal use only, all rights reserved. conflict has a profound impact on team functioning In spite of—or perhaps partly because of—their preva- (Jehn 1995), there is widespread interest in how it can lence, theories on conflict management rarely overlap. be managed effectively. Indeed, efforts to bind seem- Myriad paradigms exist, yet few linkages between them ingly intractable schisms stretch back to the beginning have been developed (Behfar et al. 2008, Blake and of research on conflict (Walton and Dutton 1969). In Mouton 1981, Greer et al. 2008, Kressel and Dean the modern era, conferences and books have been aimed 1989, Thomas and Kilmann 1974, Tinsley 2001). Con- exclusively at understanding how to manage conflict, and sequently, the status quo is a body of literature that some individuals devote their entire careers to neutral- is heavily populated, yet inadequately integrated. This izing conflict (Kressel and Dean 1989). Perhaps more would not be problematic were it the case that disparate 1125 Carton and Tewfik: A New Look at Conflict Management in Work Groups 1126 Organization Science 27(5), pp. 1125–1141, © 2016 INFORMS theories reinforced each other, or, at a minimum, did Much research on conflict management examines gen- not contradict one another. But this is not the reality— eral orientations (e.g., collaboration versus competition) particularly for research on conflict management strate- rather than specific strategies (e.g., superordinate goals). gies, which are circumscribed behaviors or interventions Accordingly, these theories do not provide a platform enacted to resolve group conflict. Superordinate goals for understanding the consequences of specific strategies have been effective bridging devices in some instances (Pruitt and Rubin 1986, Thomas and Kilmann 1974). As (Sherif 1958) but not in others (Deschamps and Brown noted above, some research has investigated the use of 1983). Increased contact between combative members individual strategies (Richter et al. 2006, Ronay et al. has been helpful in some instances (Gaertner et al. 1994) 2012) and even multiple strategies at the same time but not in others (Hewstone and Brown 1986). Boundary (Behfar et al. 2008), thereby considerably advancing the- spanning has worked well in some cases (Tushman and ory on conflict management. However, this research has Scanlan 1981) but not in others (Fleming and Wagues- examined the effect of each strategy on either a single pack 2007). Indeed, nearly a dozen conflict management type of conflict or a general indicator of conflict that strategies have accumulated equivocal results (Brewer does not differentiate between distinct conflict types. In 2007, Dovidio et al. 2007, Fiol et al. 2009). a departure from the existing literature, the central argu- To help explain these inconsistencies, we reassess the ment of our Perspectives piece is that the effectiveness of way researchers have examined the impact of conflict conflict management can be better understood by consid- management strategies on the four distinct group con- ering how individual strategies can each impact multiple flict types (relational, status, process, and task). Whereas forms of conflict—often in contrasting ways. In the dis- existing research typically considers the effect of indi- cussion we highlight additional ways that our theory redi- rects the literature on conflict management. The upshot of vidual conflict management strategies on a single con- our integrative effort is a framework that provides schol- flict type, we take a more expansive view by considering ars from various backgrounds a more holistic sense of the impact of individual strategies on multiple conflict the consequences of conflict management. types—an important advance given that different conflict types co-occur much more often than they do not (de Wit et al. 2012). After building a typology by organizing three A Typology of Conflict dozen conflict management strategies according to the Management Strategies conflict type they are best equipped to resolve, we intro- Given that the objective of conflict management strategies duce a theoretical framework that helps identify a num- is to set conflict to an optimal level for group effective- ber of occasions when the strategies that most effectively ness, the strategies that serve as the focal point of an manage one type of conflict may systematically backfire analysis of unintended effects should be those that ini- by escalating a different form of conflict. As one exam- tially set their targeted form of conflict to the most optimal
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Social Psychology of Violence
    Social Psychology of Violence From "Encyclopedia of Violence, Peace and Conflict" Situational, Cognitive, and Systemic Sources of Violence Three Kinds of Violence: Episodic, Structural, and Cultural Analysis of Conflict and Violence at Multiple Levels Social Psychology of Peace-making Social Psychology of Structural and Cultural Violence Peace Psychology: The Pursuit of Peace-building Further Reading Glossary Enemy Images Exaggerated representations of the ‘other’ as thoroughly diabolical, aggressive, and untrustworthy. Dehumanization The mental process of stripping away the human qualities of the other. Fundamental Attribution Error The tendency to perceive the bad behavior of out-group members to bad character and to perceive the bad behavior of in-group members to situational factors. Structural Violence Indirect violence through social injustice, inequity, and failure to meet basic human needs for items such as food and shelter. Superordinate Goals Goals that lie within the interests of each group in a conflict but that can be attained only through intergroup cooperation, which reduces tensions and destructive conflict. Social psychology examines the psychological influence of people on people. Although violence such as the mass killing at Virginia Tech in April 2007 by a lone gunman is often seen as individual aggression, social psychology analyzes such acts through the lens of social and situational influences. Situational, Cognitive, and Systemic Sources of Violence Following World War II, psychological analyses of violence often emphasized personality variables, such as the degree to which people are receptive to prejudice or have a tendency to endorse authoritarian beliefs. This emphasis arose as an effort to understand the rise of fascism in Europe and later, the problem of race relations in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Stereotypes and Prejudice
    Stereotypes and Prejudice Their Overt and Subtle Influence in the Classroom CONNIE T. WOLFE University of Michigan STEVEN J. SPENCER Hope College The authors examine overt and subtle forms of stereotyping and prejudice. Two theories that explain overt prejudice are reviewed: realistic conflict theory and social identity theory. Although overt prejudice seems to have declined, subtle stereotyping is still pervasive. The authors review one theory, aversive racism theory, that explains this phenomenon. They also discuss two perspectives, attributional ambiguity and stereotype threat, which provide accounts of the impact of subtle racism. Both overt and subtle prejudice present challenges for the classroom. The authors describe one intervention called the jigsaw classroom that encourages work toward common goals and helps reduce the expression and impact of overt discrimination. A second intervention program, wise schooling, is presented, which aims to reduce the impact of subtle stereotypes by reducing stereotype threat. Why do prejudice and discrimination exist? Has overt racism been replaced by more subtle forms of prejudice? How does stereotyping affect its targets? In this article we describe two theories, realistic conflict theory and social identity theory, which provide an answer to the first question. We address the second question by noting that although overt discrimination has decreased, subtle forms of prejudice are still quite common and we describe one theory, aversive racism, that provides a compelling account of this change in the expression of prejudice. Finally, we answer the third question by describing two phenomena, attributional ambiguity and stereotype threat, that result from the pervasive nature of subtle stereotyping. This article is a selective overview of what social psychology has to say about these crucial issues.
    [Show full text]
  • PREJUDICE and International Education
    PREJUDICE and International Education Conrad Hughes PREJUDICE and International Education 1. Whatisit? 2. Theories of the way prejudice develops 3. Can it be measured? 4. Schools and prejudice 5. International education and prejudice 6. How can prejudice be reduced? 1. What is it? praejudicium – “precedent” strong generalisation rationalises “beliefs held on irrational grounds [to protect ] a deep-seated system of emotions” (Thouless, 1930, p. 150) “will to misunderstand” (Shi-Xu, 2001, p. 281) Fixed mind-set Tends to be self-gratifying 2. Theories of the way prejudice develops Psychoanalytical Frustration aggression theory Dollard et al. (1939) Hovland & Sears (1940) Emotional maladjustment Adorno et al. (1950) Relative deprivation Runciman (1966) Realistic conflict theory Sherif et al. (1954) Vivian & Brown (1995) 2. Theories of the way prejudice develops Developmental Psychology “the child’s discovery of his homeland and understanding of other countries is a process of transition from egocentricity to reciprocity” Piaget & Weil (1951) Allport’s 3 stage theory of prejudice formation (1954) Pregeneralization (middle childhood) : children are generally aware of differences but do not categorize others or have strong feelings toward other groups. Early puberty : total rejection of outgroups peaks. Frenkel-Brunswick, 1948; Radke & Stage three (late adolescence) : adolescent’s Sutherland, 1949; Remy, Nathan, thinking becomes more differentiated and less Becker & Torney, 1975; Aboud, generalized. 1988; Doyle & Boud,1995; Aboud & Amato, 2001; Cushner, 2008 2. Theories of the way prejudice develops Social psychology/Sociological Belief Congruence Theory Rokeach (1960, 1971) Black Skin White Masks Frantz Fanon (1952) Social Reflection Bandura (1977) Social Identity Theory Tajfel & Turner (1986) 3. Can it be measured? Implicit Association Test Greenwald, Banaji, Nosek(1998) Clark & Clark Doll Task (1954) (Trait Attribution) The Robbers Cave Experiment Sherif et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Online Intergroup Contact
    OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES-PROOF, CENVEO 09/25/2012 1 Chapter 12 2 Online Intergroup Contact 3 Béatrice S. Hasler & Yair Amichai-Hamburger 4 Introduction 5 In our globalized world we live and work in close contact with people from various backgrounds. 6 However, globalization does not necessarily cause homogenization; quite the opposite in fact: We 7 now have to deal with differences between ethnic, racial, and religious groups in a more direct 8 way (Nolan, 1999 ). It has become crucial to everyday life to accept differences in values, beliefs, 9 and interests between various social groups while building on commonalities. Nonetheless, we are 10 witnessing a growing trend toward segregation and separatism in many places in the world (Hoter 11 et al., 2009 ). Prejudice and discrimination against rival groups often result in conflict, ranging 12 from mild hostility to all-out war, leading to the loss of thousands of lives each year. Especially in 13 areas of intractable conflict, intergroup bias is characterized and reinforced by “antagonistic 14 group histories, exclusionist myths, demonizing propaganda and dehumanizing ideologies” 15 (Ramsbotham et al., 2011 , p. 103). 16 The preamble to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 17 (UNESCO) Constitution states that “since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of 18 men that the defenses of peace must be constructed” (UNESCO Constitution, 1945 ). The chal- 19 lenge of reducing intergroup bias within the human mind lays a great necessity upon social psy- 20 chological research. Many social psychologists have attempted to understand the complex 21 phenomenon of intergroup conflict, and to provide solutions to end it.
    [Show full text]
  • TARGET ARTICLE Diversity Science
    Psychological Inquiry, 21: 77–99, 2010 Copyright C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1047-840X print / 1532-7965 online DOI: 10.1080/10478401003676501 TARGET ARTICLE Diversity Science: Why and How Difference Makes a Difference Victoria C. Plaut Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia Jurisprudence and Social Policy Program, University of California Berkeley School of Law, Berkeley, California This article proposes that addressing the complex ethnic and racial issues of the 21st century will require a diversity science. A diversity science will consider how people create, interpret, and maintain group differences among individuals, as well as the psychological and societal consequences of these distinctions. A diversity science will recognize that these significant social distinctions (in the case of this article, race and ethnicity) are not simply natural, neutral, or abstract. Instead they are created and re- created in the process of everyday social interactions that are grounded in historically derived ideas and beliefs about difference and in a set of practices and institutions that reflect these ideas and beliefs and that therefore shape psychological experience and behavior.According to this “sociocultural” framework, psychological experience and behavior, in turn, reinforce particular cultural and structural realities. As an initial step toward a diversity science, this article reviews the roots and consequences of two examples of how to think about difference, color blindness and multiculturalism. Through this sociocultural lens, intergroup behaviors can be understood as more than just products of individual prejudice. This article also proposes that a comprehensive diversity science requires a critical examination of majority group perspectives, minority group perspectives, and their dynamic interaction beyond the typical Black– White binary.
    [Show full text]
  • Principles for Intergroup Projects: a First Look
    PRINCIPLES FOR INTERGROUP PROJECTS: A FIRST LOOK June 1999 ASSOCIATION FOR THE STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITY PREFACE This report was produced by the Association for the Study and Development of Community (ASDC) for the Community Foundations/Intergroup Relations Program funded by the Ford and C.S. Mott Foundations. Taryn Higashi, Program Officer for the Ford Foundation and Lori Villarosa, Program Officer for the C.S. Mott Foundation provide guidance and leadership for the project. David Chavis of ASDC serves as the project director. Kien Lee coordinates the project. Kien Lee and Rebecca Buchanan assisted in writing the report. Principles of Intergroup Projects: A First Look page I CONTENTS Preface I 1 Introduction 1 2 Principles 2 3 Applying the Principles 8 4 References 10 Principles of Intergroup Projects: A First Look page II 1 INTRODUCTION This document describes ten principles for effective efforts to strengthen intergroup relations. Supporting evidence for the principles was derived from a review of the social science research literature on intergroup relations and management research on diversity training, review of reports by organizations and foundations supporting intergroup initiatives, and from the evaluation of the Initiative to Strengthen Neighborhood Intergroup Assets (sponsored by Eugene and Agnes E. Meyer Foundation and other foundations in the Washington, DC region). The literature reviewed was selected through electronic searches of databases such as PsychInfo. Representatives of foundations, other non-profit organizations, government agencies, and social science leaders were contacted to recommend any additional research on successful efforts. Recommendations were also sought from participants in relevant listserves such as the Society for Community Research and Action.
    [Show full text]
  • Self-Categorization and Social Identification: Making Sense of Us and Them1 Nils Karl Reimer, Katharina Schmid, Miles Hewstone, & Ananthi Al Ramiah
    Self-Categorization and Social Identification: Making Sense of Us and Them1 Nils Karl Reimer, Katharina Schmid, Miles Hewstone, & Ananthi Al Ramiah Social identity processes are central to social psychological theory and research. Social identity plays an important role in many individual and social phenomena, including health and well-being (e.g., C. Haslam, Jetten, Cruwys, Dingle & Haslam, 2018), educational achievement (e.g., Steele, Spencer & Aronson, 2002), and collect- ive action and social change (e.g., van Zomeren, Postmes & Spears, 2008). In this chapter, we provide an overview of social psychological theories on social identity, including social identity theory (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and self-categorization theory (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher & Wetherell, 1987). Prior to Tajfel’s and Turner’s seminal writings, two types of theory dominated ex- planations of intergroup relations and intergroup conflict. First, so-called ‘prejudice’ accounts proposed that intergroup conflict results from individual-level variation in a prejudiced personality (Son Hing & Zanna, 2010). Second, realistic group conflict theory (Campbell, 1965; Sherif, 1966) contended that negative intergroup relations stem from conflicting group goals and competition over resources or power (see Jackson, 1993, for a review). Compared to these explanations, social identity theory and self-categorization theory offered a unique and refined account of intergroup relations that remains important to this day. This chapter is dedicated to these interrelated approaches for understanding intergroup relations. Rather than present these theories chronologically—or focus on differences and similarities across the two theories—we take a more encompassing approach to what is often called the ‘social identity perspective’ (Abrams & Hogg, 2010).
    [Show full text]
  • Prejudice and Intergroup Relations 14 Thomas Kessler and Amélie Mummendey
    9781405124003_4_014.qxd 10/31/07 3:14 PM Page 290 Prejudice and Intergroup Relations 14 Thomas Kessler and Amélie Mummendey KEY CONCEPTS authoritarian personality category salience common ingroup identity contact hypothesis decategorization ethnocentrism ingroup favouritism intergroup anxiety intergroup behaviour minimal group paradigm mutual distinctiveness positive and negative interdependence positive distinctiveness prejudice reverse discrimination social categorization social discrimination social dominance orientation superordinate goals tokenism 9781405124003_4_014.qxd 10/31/07 3:14 PM Page 291 CHAPTER OUTLINE This chapter introduces prejudice and social discrimination together with explanations of their causes. After a brief discussion of prejudice at the level of the individual, the chapter focuses mainly on prejudice and social discrimination as intergroup phenomena. We present classic and con- temporary intergroup explanations of intergroup conflict such as realistic conflict theory and social identity theory. Furthermore, we introduce basic psychological processes such as social categorization, identification with a social group, group evaluation and group-based emotions, and consider the intergroup motivations regulating intergroup behaviour. The remainder of the chapter presents various approaches explaining when and how prejudice and intergroup conflict can be reduced. Introduction As in most parts of the modern world, social and economic change in Europe is currently charac- terized by an internationalization of all domains of life. Consequently, countries are forced to deal with a permanent and increasing flow of migration of people with different cultural, religious or ethnic backgrounds. We find ourselves confronted with people who appear to be different from us. Obviously, societal changes such as migration are not the only way in which different others are introduced into our social contexts.
    [Show full text]
  • PSYCHOLOGICA 2010, 52 – Vol
    PSYCHOLOGICA 2010, 52 – Vol. II, 585-598 585 Sherif’s theoretical concepts and intergroup relations studies: notes for a positive interdependence1 Joaquim Pires Valentim2 Sherif’s theoretical concepts on intergroup relations are not merely a historical landmark for surpassing individualistic perspectives on that domain. They could also be, nowadays, useful theoretical tools for those who are interested in studying PSYCHOLOGICA, 2010, 52 – Vol. II societal functioning. The main point of this article is to argue that social psychology can benefit from the discussion and use of Sherif’s concepts, in order to provide a more comprehensive analysis for the study of intergroup relations than those deriving from a strict use of the categorization model. This is illustrated here with two examples of supra-national identities (European identity and the lusophone community) studies which could benefit from the use of Sherif’s ideas, especially the notion of superordinate goals. However, despite the pertinence and utility of Sherif’s concepts, several weaknesses of realistic conflict theory of intergroup behaviour should also be noted, namely, the tendency to assume that conflict is always negative. This undermining idea is discussed here based not only on the perspective of disadvantaged groups but also on positive evidence from the benefits of socio-cognitive conflict provided by two fields of European social psychological studies: social developmental psychology and research on minority influence. KEY-WORDS: realistic conflict theory; intergroup relations; social identity; national identity Before M. Sherif Several theoretical concepts started developing in social psychology a few years before the 2nd. World War, aiming to understand complex social phenomena related to intergroup relations, stereotypes, prejudice and discrimination.
    [Show full text]
  • Realistic Conflict Theory
    11 Applications and Extensions of Realistic Conf ict T eory: Moral Development and Conf ict Prevention Jessica McKenzie and Gabriel Twose T e study of intergroup confl ict is of central concern to social scien- tists. Confl ict is an inevitable result of human interaction, and learning how to reduce or prevent destructive disputes is vitally important. Few theorists have contributed to the fi eld to the extent of Muzafer Sherif, whose realistic confl ict theory states that contradictory goals lead to group confl ict and cooperation-requiring superordinate goals reduce it (Sherif, 1958). Blending psychological and sociological frameworks, his Robbers Cave experiment (which would form the basis of realistic confl ict theory) remains infl uential to this day. Sherif, Harvey, White, Hood, and Sherif (1954/1988) postulated that intergroup confl ict arises as a result of situational variables, personality characteristics, interindividual diff erences, and group psychology. While we are aware that most readers will be familiar with the work, we will begin with a brief overview of Sherif’s seminal Robbers Cave study and the theory that it grew. We will then delineate subsequent research that has built on Sherif’s fi ndings, and fi nally, turn to an ex- tension of his work, incorporating research from multiple disciplines. Our proposed extension involves a moral education that utilizes concepts similar to those suggested by Sherif and by those that have built on his foundations. We argue that such a moral education off ers a promising confl ict resolution strategy by way of curtailing confl ict before its initiation. 307 Norms, Groups, Conf ict, and Social Change Robbers Cave Summary Sherif’s three-stage Robbers Cave experiment took place in 1954 in Southeastern Oklahoma.
    [Show full text]
  • From Swarms to Summer Camps : a Theoretical Deconstruction of Cohesion Among Groups of Latency Aged Boys
    Smith ScholarWorks Theses, Dissertations, and Projects 2009 From swarms to summer camps : a theoretical deconstruction of cohesion among groups of latency aged boys Prairie Youn-Yuen Chiu Smith College Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.smith.edu/theses Part of the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Chiu, Prairie Youn-Yuen, "From swarms to summer camps : a theoretical deconstruction of cohesion among groups of latency aged boys" (2009). Masters Thesis, Smith College, Northampton, MA. https://scholarworks.smith.edu/theses/1183 This Masters Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in Theses, Dissertations, and Projects by an authorized administrator of Smith ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Prairie Chiu From Swarms to Summer Camps: A Theoretical Deconstruction of Cohesion Among Groups of Latency Aged Boys ABSTRACT This thesis is an interdisciplinary theoretical deconstruction of cohesion among groups of latency aged boys. Process research on the development of cohesion among informally organized groups of latency aged boys is lacking. Also, much of cohesion research is adult-oriented, rather than child-oriented. This project seeks to elucidate some of the hows of cohesion among this population by applying a biological theory examining cohesion among aggregates of animals to a social psychological theory considering cohesion among latency aged boys. It is the author’s hope that such an approach will yield valuable insights into the mechanisms of cohesion and its facilitation, while increasing validity for both theories through a complimentary dialogue. Realistic conflict theory, developed by Muzafer Sherif on the basis of a 1961 large-scale, ambitious experiment involving two groups of latency aged boys, hypothesizes about intergroup relations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Psychology of the Relationship Between Groups - Stephen Worchel
    PSYCHOLOGY-Vol III-The Psychology of The Relationship Between Groups - Stephen Worchel THE PSYCHOLOGY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GROUPS Stephen Worchel University of Hawai’i at Hilo, USA Keywords: Intergroup contact, common enemy, superordinate goal, stereotype, prejudice, social identity, minimal group paradigm, self-categorization, intergroup perceptions Contents 1. Introduction 2. Expanding the Field: Types of Groups and Events Defining Relationships between Groups 2.1. The Social Identity Perspective 2.2. Self-Categorization 2.3. The Domains of Intergroup Relations 3. Grapes of Wrath: Behaviors That Comprise the Relation between Groups 3.1. Attraction and Discrimination 3.2. Proximity 3.3. Similarity 3.4. Ambivalence 4. In the Eye of the Beholder: Intergroup Relations and Intergroup Perceptions 4.1. They Are All the Same 4.2. Stereotypes: Cognitive Pictures of Groups 5. Improving the Relationship between Groups 6. Conclusion Acknowledgements Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary The relationshipUNESCO between groups is often – characterized EOLSS by conflict and hostility. The basis for this conflict may be competition for limited resources and/or the desire for individuals to enhance the status of groups to which they belong. Social identity theory argues that partSAMPLE of each individual’s identity CHAPTERS is formed by the groups to which they belong. In order to have a positive social identity, individuals favor their own group and discriminate against out-groups (groups that they do not belong to). Individuals are typically more attracted to their own group than to out-groups. Similarity and proximity generally leads individuals to be more attracted to in-group members. However, similarity and proximity enhance conflict and discrimination against out-groups.
    [Show full text]