|
|
|
| The conflict and integration between “Us” and “Them”：Major topics and frontiers in intergroup relations research |
| LONG Feiteng1,2, LIU Guohua2, CAI Jianwen2, ZHANG Mengjia2 |
1 Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden 2333 AK, the Netherlands;
2 School of Business and Management, Shanghai International Studies University, Shanghai 200083 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract A large body of the domestic literature on social psychology has focused on the intrapersonal and interpersonal processes of behavior. However, intergroup processes underlying social behavior receive relatively less attention. In order to adapt and develop the intergroup relations theories in China, it is necessary to critically think about and learn from the latest findings in intergroup relations research from the Western literature. The present study reviews the literature on intergroup relations indexed by SSCI and A&HCI between 2010 and 2019, aiming to offer understandings of the major topics and frontiers in recent intergroup literature. In order to extract major topics in intergroup relations research, literature clustering based on k-core theory is employed. The results show that seven major clusters of literature form the major topics in intergroup relations research; They are labelled as intergroup contact, outgroup dehumanization, positive responses, interpersonal process model, intergroup behavior, concrete construal, and social categories. The technique of burst detection is then employed to investigate keywords with citation bursts. Findings demonstrate that collective action, social network, and social norm represent the frontiers in intergroup relations research in the recent three years. Finally, prospective interdisciplinary integration with psychophysiology and social network analysis is discussed, and the present study suggests that the influence of social norm on intergroup relations need to be made clear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] Abrams, D., & Killen, M. (2014). Social exclusion of children: Developmental origins of prejudice.Journal of Social Issues, 70(1), 1-11.
[2] Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.
[3] árnadóttir K., Lolliot S., Brown R., & Hewstone M. (2018). Positive and negative intergroup contact: Interaction not asymmetry.European Journal of Social Psychology, 48(6), 784-800.
[4] Baronchelli, A. (2018). The emergence of consensus: A primer.Royal Society Open Science, 5(2), 172189.
[5] Ben David Y., Hameiri B., Benheim S., Leshem B., Sarid A., Sternberg M.,... Sagy S. (2017). Exploring ourselves within intergroup conflict: The role of intragroup dialogue in promoting acceptance of collective narratives and willingness toward reconciliation.Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 23(3), 269-277.
[6] Bettencourt B. A., Brewer M. B., Croak M. R., & Miller N. (1992). Cooperation and the reduction of intergroup bias: The role of reward structure and social orientation.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28(4), 301-319.
[7] Borders A.,& Wiley, S.(2019). Rumination about discrimination mediates the unique association between anger and collective action intentions. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, Advance online publication. 2019.09.28.
[8] Breckler, S. J. (1984). Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1191-1205.
[9] Brown R.,& Hewstone, M. (2005). An integrative theory of intergroup contact. In M. P. Zanna, Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 37(pp. 255-343). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.
[10] Castano, E., & Giner-Sorolla, R. (2006). Not quite human: Infrahumanization in response to collective responsibility for intergroup killing.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 804-818.
[11] Cea D'Ancona, M. á. (2018). What determines the rejection of immigrants through an integrative model.Social Science Research, 74, 1-15.
[12] Chayinska M., Minescu A., & McGarty C. (2017). Political solidarity through action (and inaction): How international relations changed intracultural perceptions in Ukraine.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20(3), 396-408.
[13] Cohen-Chen S., van Kleef G. A., Crisp R. J., & Halperin E. (2019). Dealing in hope: Does observing hope expressions increase conciliatory attitudes in intergroup conflict.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 83, 102-111.
[14] Crisp, R. J., & Hewstone, M. (1999). Differential evaluation of crossed category groups: Patterns, processes, and reducing intergroup bias.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2(4), 307-333.
[15] Ensari, N., & Miller, N. (2001). Decategorization and the reduction of bias in the crossed categorization paradigm.European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(2), 193-216.
[16] Falomir-Pichastor J. M., Berent J., Mugny G., & Faniko K. (2015). Egalitarianism and sexual prejudice: The role of ingroup distinctiveness motives.The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 18(e80), 1-9.
[17] Falomir-Pichastor J. M., Mugny G., & Berent J. (2017). The side effect of egalitarian norms: Reactive group distinctiveness, biological essentialism, and sexual prejudice.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20(4), 540-558.
[18] Fisher, R. J. (2016). Towards a social-psychological model of intergroup conflict. In R. J. Fisher, Ronald J. Fisher: A North American pioneer in interactive conflict resolution(pp. 73-86). New York, NY: Springer.
[19] Fritsche I., Barth M., Jugert P., Masson T., & Reese G. (2018). A social identity model of pro-environmental action (SIMPEA).Psychological Review, 125(2), 245-269.
[20] Gabarrot, F., & Falomir-Pichastor, J. M. (2017). Ingroup identification increases differentiation in response to egalitarian ingroup norm under distinctiveness threat.International Review of Social Psychology, 30(1), 219-228.
[21] Gaertner S. L., Dovidio J. F., Anastasio P. A., Bachman B. A., & Rust M. C. (1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias.European Review of Social Psychology, 4(1), 1-26.
[22] Gómez á., Dovidio J. F., Gaertner S. L., Fernández S., & Vázquez A. (2013). Responses to endorsement of commonality by ingroup and outgroup members: The roles of group representation and threat.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(4), 419-431.
[23] Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness.American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481-510.
[24] Greenwald, A. G., & Pettigrew, T. F. (2014). With malice toward none and charity for some: Ingroup favoritism enables discrimination.American Psychologist, 69(7), 669-684.
[25] Guerra R., Waldzus S., Lopes D., Popa-Roch, M., Lloret, B., & Gaertner, S. L. (2020). Little “we's”: How common identities improve behavior differently for ethnic majority and minority children.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, Advance online publication. 2020. 04.03.
[26] Halabi S., Dovidio J. F., & Nadler A. (2012). Responses to intergroup helping: Effects of perceived stability and legitimacy of intergroup relations on Israeli Arabs' reactions to assistance by Israeli Jews.International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 36(2), 295-301.
[27] Halabi S., Dovidio J. F., & Nadler A. (2016). Help that hurts? Perceptions of intergroup assistance.International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 53, 65-71.
[28] Halabi S., Nadler A., & Dovidio J. F. (2013). Positive responses to intergroup assistance: The roles of apology and trust.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16(4), 395-411.
[29] Hasan-Aslih S., Netzer L., van Zomeren M., Saguy T., Tamir M., & Halperin E. (2019). When we want them to fear us: The motivation to influence outgroup emotions in collective action.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 22(5), 724-745.
[30] Hess Y. D., Carnevale J. J., & Rosario M. (2018). A construal level approach to understanding interpersonal processes.Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 12(8), e12409.
[31] Hogg, M. A. (2016). Social identity theory. In S. McKeown, R. Haji, & N. Ferguson, Understanding peace and conflict through social identity theory: Contemporary global perspectives(pp. 3-17). New York, NY: Springer.
[32] Jaffé M. E., Rudert S. C., & Greifeneder R. (2019). You should go for diversity, but I'd rather stay with similar others: Social distance modulates the preference for diversity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 85.
[33] Kauff M., Asbrock F., Wagner U., Pettigrew T. F., Hewstone M., Schäfer S. J., & Christ O. (2017). (Bad) Feelings about meeting them? Episodic and chronic intergroup emotions associated with positive and negative intergroup contact as predictors of intergroup behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 8.
[34] Kelber M. S., Lickel B., & Denson T. F. (2020). Temporal focus, emotions, and support for intergroup aggression.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 23(2), 226-240.
[35] Kong Y.-X., Shi G.-Y., Wu R.-J., & Zhang Y.-C. (2019). K-core: Theories and applications.Physics Reports, 832, 1-32.
[36] Kteily, N., & Bruneau, E. (2016). Backlash: The politics and real-world consequences of minority group dehumanization.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(1), 87-104.
[37] Kteily N., Hodson G., & Bruneau E. (2016). They see us as less than human: Metadehumanization predicts intergroup conflict via reciprocal dehumanization.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(3), 343-370.
[38] Liberman Z., Woodward A. L., & Kinzler K. D. (2017). The origins of social categorization.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(7), 556-568.
[39] Mahfud Y., Badea C., Verkuyten M., & Reynolds K. (2018). Multiculturalism and attitudes toward immigrants: The impact of perceived cultural distance.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(6), 945-958.
[40] Mansouri, F., & Vergani, M. (2018). Intercultural contact, knowledge of Islam, and prejudice against Muslims in Australia.International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 66, 85-94.
[41] Mäs, M., & Dijkstra, J. (2014). Do intergroup conflicts necessarily result from outgroup hate.PLoS ONE, 9(6), e97848.
[42] Matera C., Picchiarini A., Olsson M., & Brown R. (2020). Does religion matter? Italians' responses towards Muslim and Christian Arab immigrants as a function of their acculturation preferences.International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 75, 1-9.
[43] McCrea S. M., Wieber F., & Myers A. L. (2012). Construal level mind-sets moderate self- and social stereotyping.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(1), 51-68.
[44] Meleady, R., & Seger, C. R. (2017). Imagined contact encourages prosocial behavior towards outgroup members.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20(4), 447-464.
[45] Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371-378.
[46] Napier J. L., Luguri J. B., Dovidio J. F., & Oltman K. A. (2018). Construing the essence: The effects of construal level on genetic attributions for individual and social group differences.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(9), 395-1407.
[47] Page-Gould E., Mendoza-Denton R., & Tropp L. R. (2008). With a little help from my crossgroup friend: Reducing anxiety in intergroup contexts through cross-group friendship.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(5), 1080-1094.
[48] Pearson A. R., West T. V., Dovidio J. F., Powers S. R., Buck R., & Henning R. (2008). The fragility of intergroup relations: Divergent effects of delayed audiovisual feedback in intergroup and intragroup interaction.Psychological Science, 19(12), 1272-1279.
[49] Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Intergroup contact theory.Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 65-85.
[50] Reis, H. T. (1994). Domains of experience: Investigating relationship processes from three perspectives. In R. Erber, & R. Gilmour, Theoretical frameworks for personal relationships(pp. 87-110). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
[51] Reis, H. T., & Shaver, P. (1988). Intimacy as an interpersonal process. In S. Duck, Handbook of personal relationships(pp. 367-389). Chichester: Wiley.
[52] Renger D., Eschert S., Teichgräber M. L., & Renger S. (2020). Internalized equality and protest against injustice: The role of disadvantaged group members' self-respect in collective action tendencies.European Journal of Social Psychology, 50(3), 547-560.
[53] Riek B. M., Mania E. W., Gaertner S. L., Mcdonald S. A., & Lamoreaux M. J. (2010). Does a common ingroup identity reduce intergroup threat.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13(4), 403-423.
[54] Rovenpor D. R., O'Brien T. C., Roblain A., De Guissmé L., Chekroun P., & Leidner B. (2019). Intergroup conflict self-perpetuates via meaning: Exposure to intergroup conflict increases meaning and fuels a desire for further conflict.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116(1), 119-140.
[55] Scheepers, D., & Derks, B. (2016). Revisiting social identity theory from a neuroscience perspective.Current Opinion in Psychology, 11, 74-78.
[56] Scheepers, D., & Ellemers, N. (2019). Social identity theory. In K. Sassenberg, & M. L.Vliek, Social psychology in action: Evidence-based interventions from theory to practice (pp.129-143). New York, NY: Springer.Scheepers, D., Saguy, T., Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L.(3), 324-341.
[57] Seery, M. D. (2013). The biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat: Using the heart to measure the mind.Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(9), 637-653.
[58] Shelton J. N., Trail T. E., West T. V., & Bergsieker H. B. (2010). From strangers to friends: The interpersonal process model of intimacy in developing interracial friendships.Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27(1), 71-90.
[59] Sirin C. V., Valentino N. A., & Villalobos J. D. (2017). The social causes and political consequences of group empathy.Political Psychology, 38(3), 427-448.
[60] Smith D. L.(2011). Less than human: Why we demean, enslave, and exterminate others. New York, NY: St. Martin's Press.
[61] Steffens N. K., Haslam S. A., Schuh S. C., Jetten J., & van Dick R. (2017). A meta-analytic review of social identification and health in organizational contexts.Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21(4), 303-335.
[62] Stephan W. G., Ybarra O., & Morrison, K. R. (2009). Intergroup threat theory. In T. D. Nelson (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination(pp. 43-59). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
[63] Tajfel H.,& Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In M. J. Hatch, & M. Schultz, Organizational identity: A reader(pp. 56-65). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[64] Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2012). Construal level theory. In P. A. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins, Handbook of theories of social psychology, volume I(pp. 118-134). Washington DC: Sage Publications.
[65] Turner J. C., Hogg M. A., Oakes P. J., Reicher S. D., & Wetherell M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
[66] Ufkes E. G., Calcagno J., Glasford D. E., & Dovidio J. F. (2016). Understanding how common ingroup identity undermines collective action among disadvantaged-group members.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 63, 26-35.
[67] Vanbeselaere, N. (1987). The effects of dichotomous and crossed social categorizations upon intergroup discrimination.European Journal of Social Psychology, 17(2), 143-156.
[68] Vezzali L., Bernardo G. A., Stathi S., Visintin E. P., & Hewstone M. (2019). Using intercultural videos of direct contact to implement vicarious contact: A school-based intervention that improves intergroup attitudes.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 22(7), 1059-1076.
[69] Wilder, D. A. (1978). Reduction of intergroup discrimination through individuation of the out-group.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(12), 1361-1374.
[70] Wilson-Daily A. E., Kemmelmeier M., & Prats J. (2018). Intergroup contact versus conflict in Catalan high schools: A multilevel analysis of adolescent attitudes toward immigration and diversity.International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 64, 12-28.
[71] Wölfer, R., & Hewstone, M. (2017). Beyond the dyadic perspective: 10 Reasons for using social network analysis in intergroup contact research.British Journal of Social Psychology, 56(3), 609-617.
[72] Wölfer R., Jaspers E., Blaylock D., Wigoder C., Hughes J., & Hewstone M. (2017). Studying positive and negative direct and extended contact: Complementing self-reports with social network analysis.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(11), 1566-1581.
[73] Wright S. C., Aron A., McLaughlin-Volpe T., & Ropp S. A. (1997). The extended contact effect: Knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(1), 73-90.
[74] Wyer, N. A. (2010). Salient egalitarian norms moderate activation of out-group approach and avoidance.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13(2), 151-165.
[75] Yaffe M. N., Solak N., Halperin E., & Saguy T. (2018). “Poor is pious”: Distinctiveness threat increases glorification of poverty among the poor.European Journal of Social Psychology, 48(4), 460-470.
[76] Yao D. J., Chao M. M., & Leung A. K.-Y. (2019). When essentialism facilitates intergroup conflict resolution: The positive role of perspective-taking.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 50(4), 483-507.
[77] Yogeeswaran, K., & Dasgupta, N. (2014). The devil is in the details: Abstract versus concrete construals of multiculturalism differentially impact intergroup relations.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(5), 772-789.
[78] Zeitzoff, T. (2018). Anger, legacies of violence, and group conflict: An experiment in post-riot Acre, Israel.Conflict Management and Peace Science, 35(4), 402-423.
[79] Zhou J., Dovidio J., & Wang E. (2013). How affectively-based and cognitively-based attitudes drive intergroup behaviours: The moderating role of affective-cognitive consistency.PLoS ONE, 8(11), e82150. |
|
|
|
