A hypothesized need to form and maintain strong, stable interpersonal relationships is evaluated in light of the empirical literature. The need is for frequent, nonaversive interactions within an ongoing relational bond. Consistent with the belongingness hypothesis, people form social attachments readily under most conditions and resist the dissolution of existing bonds. Belongingness appears to have multiple and strong effects on emotional patterns and on cognitive processes. Lack of attachments is linked to a variety of ill effects on health, adjustment, and well-being. Other evidence, such as that concerning satiation, substitution, and behavioral consequences, is likewise consistent with the hypothesized motivation. Several seeming counterexamples turned out not to disconfirm the hypothesis. Existing evidence supports the hypothesis that the need to belong is a powerful, fundamental, and extremely pervasive motivation.

The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation.

This chapter presents an outline of a theory of intergroup conflict and some preliminary data relating to the theory. Much of the work on the social psychology of intergroup relations has focused on patterns of individual prejudices and discrimination and on the motivational sequences of interpersonal interaction. The intensity of explicit intergroup conflicts of interests is closely related in human cultures to the degree of opprobrium attached to the notion of "renegade" or "traitor." The basic and highly reliable finding is that the trivial, ad hoc intergroup categorization leads to in-group favoritism and discrimination against the out-group. Many orthodox definitions of "social groups" are unduly restrictive when applied to the context of intergroup relations. The equation of social competition and intergroup conflict rests on the assumptions concerning an "ideal type" of social stratification in which the salient dimensions of intergroup differentiation are those involving scarce resources.

The social identity theory of intergroup behavior

It is argued that (a) social identification is a perception of oneness with a group of persons; (b) social identification stems from the categorization of individuals, the distinctiveness and prestige of the group, the salience of outgroups, and the factors that traditionally are associated with group formation; and (c) social identification leads to activities that are congruent with the identity, support for institutions that embody the identity, stereotypical perceptions of self and others, and outcomes that traditionally are associated with group formation, and it reinforces the antecedents of identification. This perspective is applied to organizational socialization, role conflict, and intergroup relations.

Social Identity Theory and the Organization

INDIVIDUAL PROCESSES IN INTERGROUP BEHAVIOR 3 From Individual to Group Impressions 3 GROUP MEMBERSHIP AND INTERGROUP BEHAVIOR 7 The Scope and Range of Ethnocentrism 8 The Development of Ethnocentrism 9 Intergroup Conflict and Competition 12 Interpersonal and intergroup behavior 13 Intergroup conflict and group cohesion 15 Power and status in intergroup behavior 16 Social Categorization a d Intergroup Behavior 20 Social categorization: cognitions, values, and groups 20 Social categorization a d intergroup discrimination 23 Social identity and social comparison 24 THE REDUCTION FINTERGROUP DISCRIMINATION 27 Intergroup Cooperation and Superordinate Goals " 28 Intergroup Contact. 28 Multigroup Membership and "lndividualizat~’on" of the Outgroup 29 SUMMARY 30

Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations

Social behavior is ordinarily treated as being under conscious (if not always thoughtful) control. However, considerable evidence now supports the view that social behavior often operates in an implicit or unconscious fashion. The identifying feature of implicit cognition is that past experience influences judgment in a fashion not introspectively known by the actor. The present conclusion--that attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes have important implicit modes of operation--extends both the construct validity and predictive usefulness of these major theoretical constructs of social psychology. Methodologically, this review calls for increased use of indirect measures--which are imperative in studies of implicit cognition. The theorized ordinariness of implicit stereotyping is consistent with recent findings of discrimination by people who explicitly disavow prejudice. The finding that implicit cognitive effects are often reduced by focusing judges' attention on their judgment task provides a basis for evaluating applications (such as affirmative action) aimed at reducing such unintended discrimination.

/pdf/implicit-social-cognition-attitudes-self-esteem-and-2j32pp6h9o.pdf

Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes, Self-Esteem, and Stereotypes.

Publisher Summary This chapter presents implications for creations and reduction of intergroup bias It presents the observation that persons organize their social environment by categorizing themselves and others into groups Categorization serves two functions, enables to simplify the present social environment and to predict future social behavior Although reliance on categories is efficient, there is a risk error when using a category based on phenotypic similarities to infer genotypic properties (Thus, members of a group may share similar opinions on matters relevant to the group but that similarity may not reflect an underlying similarity of motives or dispositions) Categorizing others into ingroups and outgroups produces a set of consistent and quite logical effects, including assumptions of similarity within and dissimilarity between groups, assumed homogeneity of the outgroup, and overreliance on information that supports these assumptions Further, categorization leads to intergroup comparisons and ingroup favoritism over outgroups even when no obvious justifications are present for bias

Social Categorization: Implications for Creation and Reduction of Intergroup Bias

Categorization, belief similarity, and intergroup discrimination

https://www.uni-muenster.de/imperia/md/content/psyifp/aeechterhoff/wintersemester2011-12/seminarthemenfelderdersozialpsychologie/05_wilder_intergroupcontact_jesp1984.pdf

Intergroup contact: The typical member and the exception to the rule

Reduction of Intergroup Discrimination through Individuation of the Out-Group.

In two experiments subjects were categorized into groups and made predictions about the beliefs of other in-group or out-group members. It was hypothesized that subjects would predict (a) greater homogeneity among out-group members than among in-group members, (b) greater similarity between themselves and in-group members than out-group members, and (c) greater similarity among in-group members in the presence of an out-group. In addition, assumptions of homogeneity and similarity were expected (d) to be strongest on items relevant to the categorization criterion and (e) to be accentuated over time. Results from the first study supported all but the final hypothesis. In a second study subjects were given base-rate information about the beliefs of either in-group or out-group members and were asked to predict the responses of another in-group or out-group member. Subjects systematically biased their predictions so as to reduce differences between their own opinions and in-group members' positions and to increase differences between their opinions and out-group members' positions. In addition, in-group members were expected to be more similar to the subjects when an out-group was present than when no explicit out-group existed. Finally, as in the first experiment, these biases of prediction were strongest for items relevant to the categorization criterion.

David A. Wilder

Papers

Social Categorization: Implications for Creation and Reduction of Intergroup Bias

Categorization, belief similarity, and intergroup discrimination

Intergroup contact: The typical member and the exception to the rule

Reduction of Intergroup Discrimination through Individuation of the Out-Group.

Empirical contributions: Predictions of belief homogeneity and similarity following social categorization