Is there any scapegoat around? Determinants of intergroup conflicts at different categorization levels.

Recategorization at a higher level reduces tensions between groups. However, recategorization may cause conflicts between the common in-group and a new out-group. Additionally, determinants of conflict between subgroups may enhance conflict at the higher categorization level. In the context of German unification, the authors explored these suggestions with an East German 3-wave longitudinal study and a West German control group. Results show that a salient East German versus West German categorization enhances conflict between subgroups, whereas categorization as German enhances conflict at the common in-group level. Determinants of subgroup conflict also influence conflict at the inclusive level (Germans and foreigners). Thus, recategorization is a 2-edged instrument: Although it reduces conflict at the subgroup level, it may initiate conflict at the common in-group level.     

The ingroup as pars pro toto: projection from the ingroup onto the inclusive category as a precursor to social discrimination

In an approach to intergroup discrimination and tolerance, it is assumed that the outgroup's difference from the ingroup is evaluated with reference to the prototype of the higher-order category that includes both groups. Two correlational studies yielded evidence that (a) group members tend to perceive their ingroup as relatively prototypical for the inclusive category (projection), (b) members highly identified with both ingroup and inclusive category (dual identity) tend to project most, and (c) relative prototypicality is related to negative attitudes toward the outgroup. The latter relation was further specified in Study 3, manipulating the valence of the inclusive category. Projection was related to more negative attitudes toward the outgroup when the inclusive category was primed positively but to more positive attitudes when it was primed negatively. The meaning of dual identities for intergroup relations is discussed.     

Positive distinctiveness and social discrimination: An old couple living in divorce

The paper highlights the relation between positive distinctiveness and social discrimination as key concepts in Social Identity Theory. The often replicated finding of mere categorization leading to ingroup favouritism and outgroup discrimination plays a major role in supporting the view that discrimination is functional for a positive social identity. The paper confronts the mere categorization effect with recent findings which throw severe doubts on its robustness. Particularly the failure to extrapolate categorization effects to intergroup behaviour involving aversive stimuli (the positive–negative–asymmetry of social discrimination) lead to the plea for further specifications of SIT and its validity.     

Modeling instrumental agression in adults in a laboratory setting

Summary Five experiments with 353 young adults performing a game on an aggression machine are reported, three of them testing hypotheses concerning the effects of a model's aggressiveness and social status on instrumental aggressive behavior, and two investigating aspects of reliability and validity. Model's aggressiveness increased the Ss' aggressive behavior in all experiments. The use of presumptive monetary losses as a means by which SS punish their opponents in aggression machine experiments is as effective as presumed electric shocks, and therefore seems preferable in further experimental studies of aggression.

---

Zusammenfassung Es wird über fünf Experimente mit insgesamt 353 jüngeren Erwachsenen als Versuchspersonen berichtet, deren instrumentell-aggressives Verhalten an einem Aggressionssimulator untersucht wird. Drei der Experimente dienten der Prüfung von Hypothesen über den Einfluß von Modell-Aggression und Modell-Status auf instrumentell-aggressives Verhalten, zwei weitere untersuchten Aspekte der Reliabilität und Validität. In allen Experimenten zeigte sich ein Anwachsen aggressiven Verhaltens, wenn das Modell aggressiv war. Ferner ergab sich, daß die Verwendung angeblicher Geldstrafen als Mittel, den Gegenspieler an der Aggressionsmaschine zum Rückzug zu zwingen, in gleichem Maße effizient war wie die Vergabe angeblicher Elektroschocks. Daher wird der Verwendung von Geldstrafen in weiteren Aggressionsexperimenten der Vorzug gegeben.

---

---

Detailed reports in German should be requested from the autor at Universität Bielefeld, Postfach 8640, D-4800 Bielefeld 1 (Bielefelder Arbeiten zur Sozialpsychologie No. 2, 3, 10, 18, 25 for Experiments 1 to 5)

---

The author is indebted to the following coworkers: Ulrich Goertz, Günter Maus, Amélie Mummendey, Bernd Schiebel, Friedrich-Wilhelm Schöer, Rüdiger Stallberg, Gabriele Sturm, Uwe Troske     

Social-consensual conceptions concerning the progress of aggressive interactions

The present study investigated social consensual conceptions concerning the appropriateness relation between an initiative aggressive action and the reaction to it. To this end subjects were asked to choose between four configurations of mediatory information between B's initial act and A's reaction (i.e. ‘A's offence at B's behaviour’, ‘inappropriateness of B's behaviour’, ‘A's personal standards’, ‘A's fear of negative consequences’), so as to combine identical initial acts with incompatible reactions (i.e. ‘escalation’, ‘breaking’ of, and ‘compensation’) into meaningful episodes. The statistical procedure used, configural frequency analysis, shows that as compared with the number of theoretically possible configurations, very few were selected by subjects (with a high degree of unanimaty) as being specific to a particular type of reaction. Apparently subjects have definite and uniform conceptions about the appropriateness of incompatible reactions to certain aggressive actions in interpersonal conflicts.     

Classification of situations specific to field and behaviour: The context of aggressive interactions in schools

Based on a social psychological concept of aggression, in which the processes of definition and judgement of acts of behaviour are credited with central meaning, the situational context of aggressive interactions was systematized for a specific field (school). It is assumed that the particular circumstances of a situation provide information for the interpretation of a particular action, and that this interpretation varies depending on these circumstances. In the following study, norm deviation, intent and injury, are used as central criteria for judging on action as aggressive in order to establish a taxonomy of social situations, presented as verbal scenarios, that is both field-and behaviour-specific. 686 school children aged between 13 and 19 years participated in this study. By using a multivariate analysis procedure, groups of situations were identified in which similar judgements of a particular action emerged. Both typical judgement patterns and corresponding situation characteristics were used in the interpretation of the resulting situation taxonomy.     

Perceived legitimacy of intergroup status differences: its prediction by relative ingroup prototypicality

Research demonstrates that the perceived legitimacy of intergroup status differences has profound effects on intergroup attitudes, emotions and behavior. However, there has only been little intergroup research that predicts the perception of legitimacy. We hypothesize that the perception of legitimate or illegitime status relations depends upon the perceived relative prototypicality of the ingroup for the inclusive category. Since the prototype of the inclusive category provides a normative comparison standard for subgroup evaluation, similarity to this standard (i.e. prototypicality) should be positively evaluated and used to justify high status. A first study in a natural intergroup context (N = 67) offered correlational data in support of the predicted relationship. The second study (N = 60), using Germans as ingroup with Poles as outgroup and Europe as inclusive category, demonstrated that the link between prototypicality and legitimacy is contingent upon the valence of the inclusive category. In order to elucidate the causal direction, the third study manipulated relative prototypicality in an artificial intergroup context (N = 94) and introduced status as a moderator variable. Overall, we found strong support for the hypothesis that legitimacy is related to prototypicality and that this relation is moderated by ingroup status and valence of the inclusive category. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Evaluation of aggressive interactions in interpersonal and intergroup contexts

The article deals with possible differences in the evaluation of interpersonal and intergroup aggression. Study I investigated whether the typical perspective-specific divergence in judgments about aggressive interactions (with actors evaluating their behavior as more reasonable and less inappropriate than recipients) varied in interpersonal and intergroup contexts. Additionalty, the possible mediating influence of lay epistemic motivation and subjective judgmental confidence was explored. Results indicated that the social context had an important impact on the evaluation of aggressive interactions: there was a lower dissent between actors and recipients in the intergroup than in the interpersonal condition. However, the direction of this pattern of data differed from what could be derived from theories of aggressive and intergroup behavior. Subjective confidence and lay epistemic motivation did not influence the inappropriatencess ratings. Study II tried to shed some further light on the context-specific evaluation of aggressive interaction by presenting episodes of different severity and by obtaining judgments on both actions as well as reactions. Results showed that-irrespective of severity-aggressive reactions were evaluated more negatively in intergroup contexts. It is proposed that this effect stemmed from context-specific differences in the application of the norm of reciprocity.     

Social comparison,similarity and ingroup favouritism-A replication

Studied the effects of different kinds of similarity between social groups on ingroup favouritism using a modified replication of an experiment by Turner (1978). Instead of replicating the results of Turner, the data showed just the opposite. They are discussed within the framework of social identity theory.     

Superordinate identities and intergroup conflict: The ingroup projection model

This chapter summarises results from a research programme on the psychological basis of tolerance and discrimination in intergroup relations, with particular consideration of the role of superordinate identities. According to the ingroup projection model, a relevant superordinate group provides dimensions and norms for comparisons between ingroup and outgroup. Groups gain positive value or status when they are considered prototypical for the (positively valued) superordinate group. Group members tend to generalise (project) distinct ingroup characteristics onto the superordinate category, implying the relative prototypicality of their ingroup. To the extent that outgroup difference is regarded as a deviation from the ethnocentrically construed prototype it is evaluated negatively. Our research studied consequences and determinants of ingroup projection, as well as moderators of its implications. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the processes involved in intergroup discrimination and indicate new pathways for the reduction of prejudice, towards mutual intergroup appreciation and tolerance.