17. Studies of the patterns of intergroup interaction

An example of research on intergroup interaction is the study of intergroup aggression in the concept of G. Lebon , negative attitudes to another group in the work of T. Adorno , hostility and fear in psychoanalytic theories, etc.

Experimental studies in this area were carried out by M. Sheriff in the American camp for adolescents.

Adolescents were offered a general camp cleaning activity, during which spontaneously established friendly groups were identified; in the second stage, adolescents were divided into two groups in such a way as to destroy the naturally existing friendship.

The ratio of one group to another was measured, containing no hostility towards each other.

At the third stage, the groups were assigned various activities on the conditions of competition, and in its course an increase in intergroup hostility was recorded; in the fourth stage, the groups were re-united and engaged in common activities.

The measurement of the relations of the “former” groups to each other at this stage showed that intergroup hostility has decreased.

M. Sheriff proposed a group approach to the study of intergroup relations: sources of intergroup hostility or cooperation are not found here in the motives of an individual, but in situations of group interaction , but purely psychological characteristics, cognitive and emotional processes governing various aspects of this interaction, have been lost.

In the framework of this orientation, A.Tashfel's experiments were performed.

Studying intergroup discrimination (intragroup favoritism in relation to his group and non-group hostility towards an alien group), A. Tashfel considered the cause of these phenomena.

He showed that the establishment of a positive attitude towards his group is also observed in the absence of an objective basis for conflict between groups.

In the experiment, the students were shown two paintings by artists and offered to count the number of points in each picture.

Then they arbitrarily divided the participants of the experiment into two groups: those who recorded more points from one artist fell into one, and those who recorded more from the other got into one. Immediately, the “own” and “alien” effect arose and commitment to one’s group (intra-group favoritism) and hostility towards an alien group was revealed.

This allowed A. Tashfel to conclude that the cause of intergroup discrimination is not in the nature of the interaction, but in the simple fact of awareness of belonging to his group and, as a result, manifestation of hostility to a foreign group.

It was concluded that the field of intergroup relations is a sphere that includes four main processes: social categorization, social identification, social comparison, social (intergroup) discrimination. The analysis of these processes should, in A.Tashfel's opinion, represent the actual socio-psychological aspect in the study of intergroup relations.

The group carries the structure of internal interpersonal formal and informal relationships that are associated with the external relations of the group.

External relations affect the internal relations of the group. This dependence was determined in the studies of M. Sheriff, who studies the patterns of intergroup relations: the division of a large social group into smaller groups (subgroups) contributes to the formation of a social sense of belonging - the sense of "we", which generates the perception of social phenomena through the prism of "our" and "alien .

In the context of competitive activity, a conflict of interests provokes the development of aggression and hostility towards representatives of another group.

There is an increase in intra-group solidarity, increasing the impenetrability of the boundaries of group membership.

Social control in the group is strengthened, the degree of individuals deviating from the fulfillment of group norms decreases. The threat from the other group causes positive changes in the structure of the group, which feels in danger.

The leading relationship between social groups is the relationship of rivalry.

The most important factor of influence on intergroup relations is the nature of the joint activity , which was studied by V. Hanoves , a member of an international expedition.

Its participants differed from each other by nationality, age, culture, religion, political views, etc.

During the expedition, the group was divided into subgroups three times.

At the first stage of joint activities, when the tension was weak, the group was divided into two subgroups based on sociability .

Intergroup relations changed as soon as the expedition began to encounter difficulties that required the maximum application of forces.

The emergence of three subgroups was observed, the formation of which was associated with the attitude to work .

When the expedition came to an end, intergroup relations changed again: the division into subgroups according to the level of culture .

Conflict relations arise between groups that have substantial grounds for comparison.

Conclusions of V. Hanoves: joint activity is the best way to get to know each other, especially if the activity proceeds in an extreme situation. Neither racial, age nor social differences play a significant role in relations between people.

The exception is the cultural level.

In an extreme situation, a group is divided into microgroups several times depending on the circumstances and personal characteristics of the subjects of interaction.

The main functions of intergroup relations are the preservation, stabilization and development of groups as functional units of social life.

When interacting with other groups, each strives for a steady state by maintaining a relative balance of integration and differentiation trends.

If in external relations of the group the tendencies of differentiation are intensified, then the internal relations will be characterized by the strengthening of the tendency of integration.

Competition, collaboration, non-participation relationships are the main strategies for interaction between groups. The dominant strategy is the rivalry strategy.