Realist group conflict theory

In social psychology, the realistic group conflict theory is among the theories that emphasize the social or group aspect. Before delving into it, let’s define some concepts.

What is meant by group? According to Tajfel (1982), A group can be defined based on two types of criteria: external and internal..

External criteria are designations that come from outside the person themselves. (“he is a woman”, “he is a man”, “he is a gypsy”, “a black man”, “a psychologist”, “a politician”, etc.). For his part, internal criteria are defined by “group identification”that is, by the degree to which a person is considered a member of a certain group.

What do we call intergroup conflict? To the conflict that occurs when two groupssocieties or nations They perceive that their objectives (understood in a broad sense), intentions and actions are incompatible with each other.

The conflict can range from divergence on a specific point (which would not hinder intergroup relations in other facets than the point in dispute) to intractable conflict, in which the groups seek the destruction of the opponent.

Defining realistic group conflict theory

In her research work, Beatriz Montes Berges (2008) says this: “realistic conflict theory (Sherif and Sherif, 1953; Sherif, 1966) proposes that the key factor in understanding intergroup interactions is competition for limited resources or incompatible goalsthat is, goals that only a group can achieve.”

This competition would generate a conflict situation between the groups that would only be reduced by superordinate goals that can only be achieved by cooperating. Thus, from their point of view, prejudice had its roots in conflicts of interest, real or perceived, between one group and others.

The experimental paradigm of Muzafer and Sherif

Sherif and Sherif Muzafer and Carolyn Wood Sherif carried out work with groups of pre-adolescents (11-12 years old) published in 1953. Over three weeks, they put the groups through three stages. Previously, cooperative activities were carried out between all participants in order to establish a relationship of friendship between them.

Afterwards, in the first stage (group formation), The boys were separated into two groups. trying to ensure that those who had established friendship remained in different groups. Each group carried out tasks in which group participation was necessary to achieve the set objectives.

In the second stage (intergroup conflict) competitive activities were carried out between both groups in which only one could reach the objective. At this stage, clearly hostile attitudes appeared among the members of the groups.

Finally, a third stage (conflict reduction) in which Activities were developed with goals that exceeded the capacity of each of the groups separately. (superordinate goals), in such a way that they had to cooperate to achieve them (previously trying to reduce the conflict through information about the other group, moral reasons for it or by mere contact had failed).

This paradigmatic work shows how people act intergroupally, that is, “in terms of their group identification” (Sherif, 1966). At first, the interaction is free between all the young people, therefore they relate “in terms of their individual identification”, but mere membership in a group disrupts that situation, going from being individuals to members of group X.

What does it mean for realist group conflict theory?

The Sherifs’ approach to realist group conflict theory assumes that Attitudes and behaviors are a reflection of the interests they pursue at all times the groups. These interests can be:

Incompatible: situation known as “zero sum” (the satisfaction of interests by one group – the achievement of its objectives – prevents the other group from satisfying its own).Compatible: the satisfaction of the interests of one group does not interfere with the satisfaction of the interests of the other group (the achievement of different objectives for different groups is possible).

In turn, these interests give rise to three types of functional relationships between the groups:

Relations competition: when interests are strictly incompatible.Relationships of independence: when interests are strictly compatible.Relationships cooperation: when interests are compatible, but each group cannot satisfy its interests by itself, a joint effort is necessary to do so.

What key do these authors propose for conflict resolution?

In realist group conflict theory, The key to conflict resolution lies in the creation of superordinate goals. This measure contains important difficulties. One is to find goals of this type in real life and involve antagonistic groups with a long history of confrontations in joint action.

On the other hand, The use of this measure must be carried out under conditions that guarantee the final success of the operationsince otherwise the discrepancies between the groups would become even more acute, blaming each other for the failure.

Criticisms of Sherif and Sherif’s studies

1.- In these experiences Cooperation results in the success of the task. But, in real life it is not easy to find superordinate goals and even less to have a guarantee that they can be achieved successfully.

2.- More than a cooperation between two different groups, what has been created It is a new situation in which people act as members of the same group, from a larger group. This fact, on the other hand, has another consequence: the characteristics of the original group may be lostwhich can become a threat to their collective identity.

3.- The premise of the study is criticized: conflict is always negative and must be eradicated, an approach that is inadequate in situations of injustice and inequality. It would be necessary to test whether cooperation is achieved in contexts of dominance-submission, since the studies have only been carried out with groups of similar level.

Final conclusions on the realistic group conflict theory

Evidently, One of the most important problems with realist group conflict theory is that it assumes that social groups are on an equal footing. to compete for resources. However, outside of the summer camps, where researchers carried out their experiments, relationships between groups are more complexcharacterized by the existence of dominant groups with disproportionate access to material and symbolic resources.

This allows them to “react” more quickly to threats and implement social control mechanisms to perpetuate their privileged position. Perhaps it is precisely for this reason that the later developments from realistic group conflict theory They direct their attention to the analysis of the perception of outgroups as threats.

Another important problem is that it represents a direct relationship between conflict of interest and intergroup hostility. However, our intuition reminds us that although many people are unjustly stripped of their rights, this does not necessarily translate into hostility against the group or “threatening” or depriving groups.

You might be interested…