Intergroup contact theory and the concept of regrouping are two theoretical concepts that consider the relationship of dominance and oppression between groups. While intergroup contact theory describes a process of reducing prejudice (Pettigrew, 1998), the concept of regrouping is one aspect of a description of the relationship of dominant and oppressed groups, with regrouping being considered as a path towards liberation for the dominated group (Apfelbaum, 1979). These two theoretical frameworks share many similarities, but also many differences that I would like to explore.
Intergroup contact theory and the concept of regrouping are very similar in the sense that the end goal of both is essentially changing the status of an oppressed and …show more content…
Secondly, the group must rediscover and, in some cases, rewrite their own history (Apfelbaum, 1979). The implication is that the group will be redefined into a new group, outside the umbrella of subordination.
Similar to the concept of regrouping, is the concept of "recategorization" mentioned in Pettigrew 's intergroup contact theory article (1998). In the theory, it is proposed that after an extended time together two or more groups begin to recategorize into a larger inclusive group that accepts similarities (Pettigrew, 1998). How this is similar to regrouping is that it deals with redefining a group, or groups, into a new group. The main difference between recategorization and regrouping is that recategorization deals with an in-group and an out-group coming together to create a new group (Pettigrew, 1998). Regrouping, however, is a solely within-group recategorization (Apfelbaum, 1979).
One of the strengths of the intergroup contact theory is that it was based on early empirical evidence originating from Allport 's own field research (Pettigrew, 1998). Recent empirical evidence stemming from research with African Americans has also been found to be supportive of the theory (Pettigrew, 1998). In support of Apfelbaum 's ideas is the fact that she backed up her claims with nearly 20 pages of sources (Apfelbaum, 1979). Clearly, she wanted to provide the extensive amount of
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
Sociologist Donald Noel’s hypotheses state, “If two or more groups come together in a contact situation characterized by ethnocentrism, competition, and a differential in power, then some form of racial or ethnic stratification will result (Healey & O 'Brien, 2015, p. 104). In this hypothesis, the contact situation is the initial contact of the groups and results in a dominant and minority group.
A majority of people here in the United States have felt a touch of the issues, that come with classification of race. Due to this, many men and women of the minority racial groups are put in to sub-groups as a way to “help” give them an identity that can relate to. This idea to separate people by giving them identities is called the Racial Formation Theory. First introduced by Michael Omi and Howard Winant, the theory is a tool that helps build the idea that race is a social contracted tool where your racial status is weighed upon by many factors such as by those social, economic and political origin. By using race a way to build lines and boundaries, this has resulted in causing a rift to grow between the majority and minority
In conclusion there has been evidence to show that groups have both a negative and also a positive effect on its members. It has been demonstrated that some people will cope with the negative effects in an unproductive way by changing their behaviour in way that was detrimental to the well being of themselves and its other members. However the positives can have a very powerful effect on a person in that it can promote a sense of identity, loyalty and
Lessing could have better addressed the different types of groups that exist instead of amalgamating them all together. She spoke generally of groups and pressures to conform instead of going more in depth. She says "The fact is that we all live our lives in groups---the family, work groups, social, religious, and political groups" (Lessing 333). She mentions specific groups such as family and political groups, but she could have added more specificity to the topics by examining each one and the effects they have the individual. Asch examines different group situations by setting up variations on his experiment. For example, he added a partner to the experiment that
Few people are going to openly admit to being prejudice against people of other races, gender, and religions. However that doesn’t stop many of us from having unintentional racist thoughts. In 1979, Henri Tajfel, a social psychologist, proposed that “the groups which people belonged to are an important source of pride and self-esteem. Groups give us a sense of social identity: a sense of belonging to the social world.” This ideal of categorizing and subconsciously labeling ourselves is better known as “Social Identity Theory”. Tajfel continues by saying “In order to increase our self-image we enhance the status of the group to which we belong. For example, England is the best country in the world! We can also increase our self-image by discriminating and holding prejudice views against the out group (the group we don’t belong to). For example, the Americans, French etc. are a bunch of losers! Therefore, we divided the world into “them” and “us” based through a process of social categorization (i.e. we put people into social groups). This is known as in-group (us) and out-group (them). Social identity theory states that the in-group will discriminate against the out-group to enhance their self-image.” We all unintentionally discriminate against others that are in the “out-group”, and by doing this we are excluding ourselves from certain religions, cultures, races, and even genders. This ideal of labeling ourselves can be traced back to childhood and factors such as where we
The kinds of groups that Interactionist study are diverse. They can differ between teenage gangs and older people, teachers and students and patients and visitors on hospital wards. They study how these groups respond to each other to see if our behaviour is a result of how we interpret situations within smaller groups.
We are taught from a symbolic interactionist perspective racial socialization often give way to a sense of solidarity, a union with one’s ethnic group which can tribute to the hostility demonstrated towards another group. Another familiar term ethnocentrism, a place of superiority which contains the notion one’s ethnic group is superior while the other is inferior which proves the further we are from human values and the promotion of it peace can never be achieved. The Dalai Lama says if we have peace in us we can be at peace with those around us.
“Power relationships are shaped by people’s mental biases and beliefs about individuals in other groups” (pg. 108 Social Inequality). Despite the creation of new groups,
For example, a female individual who believes in feminism will most likely identify higher with a group of feminists than a group of females that are ant-feminist. This strength in social identification leads to in-group favouritism whereby members see the members of their group in a positive manner and see members of other groups in a negative or denigrative manner (Swann Jr et al., 2009). Through the process of depersonalisation. self-categorisation and group membership, an individual develops a social identity that serves as a social cognitive schema for behaviours that are related to the group (Korte, 2007; Swann Jr et al., 2009).
Group Think people keeps their beliefs and opinion aside to agree upon a decision whereas in Asch effect people change their beliefs and opinions according to the majority of the group’s decision.
Many circumstances oblige people to move from their native country to a foreign one. From this movement of migration have emerged many ethnic groups. An ethnic group is a restraint number of persons living in a larger society and sharing the same distinct cultural heritage. Some people tend to bury their habits and accommodate to the new way of life. However others hold on to their identity and try to identify their race and maintain it. This enriches societies and makes them multi-racial. Therefore, every ethnic group is essential to complete the mosaic. Although they are sometimes threatened, minorities must fight to preserve their principles. Why must they fight? Because racial identification has many positive impacts on the members.
In-groups are often recreated to fit the needs of individual group members, and when the needs are strongly aggressive, the redefinition of the in-group may primarily be in terms of the hated out-groups (Allport 94). The hated out-group in terms of racial relations of whites is people of color.
We as humans tend to relate to those that are similar to us, and tend to alienate those that we deem as different than us. Whether it is by race, gender, culture, or religion, it is something that is almost always present in human interactions, and often times can be completely subconscious. In our textbook Interpersonal Communication by Kory Floyd, an ingroup is defined as “A group of people with whom one identifies.” An outgroup is conversely defined as “A group of people whom one does not identify.” Henri Tajfel first coined this terminology while he was working to devise his social identity theory. These ideas of classifying people into ingroups and outgroups can lead to many
In fact, people can move from one group to another. A graduate seminar, for example, can start as a secondary group focused on the class at hand, but as the students work together throughout their program, they may find common interests and strong ties that transform them into a primary group.