Studies summaries
cooperation and competition
For the individual:
- Theories:
- SIT – in-group favouritism and out-group discrimination
- Kin selection- will behave altruistically to help max. survival chance of their genes.
- Empathy-altruism model- genuine empathetic concern for others.
- Reciprocal altruism – help another for a favour(I’ll scratch your back if you’ll scratch mine)
- Factors:
- Nature of situation
- Greed
- Behaviours of other and expectation from others- Keer(1983)
- sucker effect – when people believe they are doing more than their fair share.
- Free-riding effect – doing working as hard when someone else is working hard
- Bio: De Dreu et al (2012) – increase in oxytocin increases cooperation with in- group and incrases competition with out-group
- Realistic conflict theory(RCT)
- Opposing goals
- Explains in-group favoritism and out-group discrimination
- To make cooperation need to have superordinate goals – can only be completed when done together between groups.
- Compete over resources
- Sherif et al(1961) - *can be used for all major topics in Group dynamics
- Competition over scare resources and opposing goals induced conflict and discrimination
- Superordinate goal reduces conflict
- BUT Tyerman and Spencer(1983)- cross cultural replication with UK sample showed different results; could not induce conflict
- Savelkoul et al(2011) – supports both RCT and contact theory to some extent.
- Opposing goals
- Group size:
- Increase number members in group = less cooperation as:
- Increases free riding effect
- Feel like they make less of a difference
- Individual can be less identifiable
- Increase number members in group = less cooperation as:
- Culture affects Cooperation
- Scattler and Keer(1991) – social norms that encourage cooperation play a key role in learning of behaviour
- Gabrenya et al(1985)
- Individualistic cultures work better alone, lacks cooperation
- Collectivistic work better with others
prejudice and discrimination
- Discrimination – treats someone differently based on membership of a group rather than individual’s own merit
- Prejudice – (un)favourable predisposition toward any member of any group.
- Needs all 3 factors, cannot isolate any of the approach
- Biological:
- May be a natural reaction
- Harris and Fiske(2006) – when there is perception of a threat to the outgroup, the amygdale may play a role in our perception of the outgroup
- -ve:
- Correlation research
- Mostly adults
- May be over-interpreted
- Need to be cautious when attribution brain function to behaviour as need to consider ethics and need to consider emotion
- May be a natural reaction
- Sociocultural:
- Social norms play a key role in society’s prejudice
- Moss-Reacusin(2012) – there is -ve prejudice toward females in attaining jobs in the scientific field.
- Integrated threat theory- 3 types of threat
- Threats which create expectations about out-group
- Realistic threat eg. Competition for jobs
- Symbolic threats- eg. Meeting of cultures and potential loss of values
- McLaren(2004) – The beliefs that immigrants will challenge or undermine their national values are stronger predictors of -ve attitude toward immigrants than realistic threats.
- Cognitive:
- Theory of threatened egoticism
- Intergroup discrimination occurs when our own perception of self is threatened; acting out against out-group makes us feel better
- Fein and Spencer(1997)
- Availability heuristic – base decision on information that is most readily available – Chou and Edge(2012) is not necessarily about prejudice but it discusses availability heuristic, some clever connection to prejudice will be needed to use this study for this topic
- Theory of threatened egoticism
origin of conflict and conflict resolution
- Conflict is a continuum. Can start with competition from SIT, RCT then prejudice.
- Group polarization(theory)
- When decision and opinions of people in a group become more extreme than what they privately believe.
- Ingroup and do no wrong, motives are justified and vicaversa.
- Boundary activation – need to distinguish
- Out- group negativity
- Out-group homogenization – all are the same(stereotype)
- In-group solidarity- greater threat means a stronger demand for loyalty to the in-group
Conflict resolution
Education:
- Diversity training
- Students are labelled inferior and superior groups for a week. Then roles are switched so they understand how it feels. Usually inferior group that becomes superior are less mean as they know how it feels.
- Little research to support
- Steward et al(2003) – simulation was not highly effective
- Byrnes and Kiger(1990)- there was no change in prejudice toward African Americans
- Cooperative learning(jigsaw classroom)
- Must rely on each other for their learning. Everyone must contribute so everyone is valued. (teaching each other after you have become the ‘master’ in your thing’
- Paluck and Green(2009) increases peer relationship
- Aronson and Bridgeman(1979) – lowers bullying and interaction between groups during play
- -ve:
- No evidence for long term benefits
- Research done in schools have confounding variables
- Social cognitive learning theory
- Paluck(2009) – use of media(eg. Tv) can think through difficult issue, vicarious and non-threatening interaction between groups.
- Conditions:
- Development of intergroup friends
- Opportunity for personal interaction between members- Brown et al(2003)
- Equal status
- Support of authorities/law
- Have common goal
- Intergroup cooperation
- Savelkoul et al(2011) – shows support
- -ve:
- Difficult to create situation to overcome meaning and practical obstacle
- Result of experience may be limited to context of meaning
- Language barrier
- May need English translator, which is expensive, artificial and no practical to translate back and forth
- Select out-group who speak the language
- Usually means higher level of education
- ‘superior’ group’s language may make behaviours salient
Information is mostly complied from:
Popov, Alexey. Psychology: for the IB Diploma. 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, 2018.
Crane, John. “IB Psychology.” ThinkIB Student Pages, www.student.thinkib.net/psychology?lg=8007.
Photo: Oppong, Thomas. “Feeling Good About Yourself Makes Your Relationships Easier.” Medium, Kaizen Habits, 16 Aug. 2019, medium.com/kaizen-habits/feeling-good-about-yourself-makes-your-relationships-easier-2aa1c080cfaf.
Popov, Alexey. Psychology: for the IB Diploma. 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, 2018.
Crane, John. “IB Psychology.” ThinkIB Student Pages, www.student.thinkib.net/psychology?lg=8007.
Photo: Oppong, Thomas. “Feeling Good About Yourself Makes Your Relationships Easier.” Medium, Kaizen Habits, 16 Aug. 2019, medium.com/kaizen-habits/feeling-good-about-yourself-makes-your-relationships-easier-2aa1c080cfaf.