Looking Back as We Look Ahead: Integrating Research, Theory, and Practice on Intergroup Relations

This article looks back at the origins of intergroup relations in social psychology just over 50 years ago. Pioneers in the field—Robin Williams, Gordon Allport, and Kurt Lewin—were all deeply concerned with integrating social science and social action. We seek to re-center this mutuality of research and practice, and to expand the focus of intergroup relations from prejudice reduction to social inclusion. The articles in this issue document cutting-edge research, theory, and practice, and make substantive contributions to the future of intergroup relations. A unique feature of this issue is a set of commentaries by prominent scholars and practitioners in the fields of intergroup relations and education. Walter Stephan, James Banks, Thomas Pettigrew, and Patricia Gurin each reflect on the collection of articles through the lens of their own personal and professional biographies to help define the intersections of research, theory, and practice on intergroup relations.     

Theoretical, Empirical, and Practical Approaches to Intergroup Conflict

The study of intergroup relations has long been an interest of social scientists, particularly members of The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues. The articles in this issue offer a wide variety of theoretical, empirical, and practical approaches to understanding and resolving national and international group conflict. This introductory article summarizes the original social psychological work that laid the foundation for contemporary thinking on intergroup relations, and presents an overview of each of the contributions in this issue. Also discussed are applications of social psychology to real-world intergroup conflicts.     

Understanding the Harm of Hate Crime

This article provides an overview of the context and content of this issue devoted to hate crime. Working definitions of hate crime and hate speech are situated within the broader context of intergroup relations, prejudice, aggression, and law and social policy. Theory and research from social psychology, criminology, and legal studies are utilized to describe this context. We present summaries of the multidisciplinary contributions to this issue and note how these articles emphasize the origins of hate crime, the harm that it creates, and victims' and society's response to hate crime. They also highlight tensions between the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. Finally, we note the interrelationships among these contributions and discuss the policy implications that arise from their analyses.     

Gordon Willard Allport: A Tribute

In tribute to Gordon Allport, this article discusses four interrelated topics. First, Allport's life at Harvard is briefly described. Next three interwoven features of his work are advanced to explain why his contributions to psychology are both unique and lasting. (1) His work offered a broadly eclectic balance of the many sides of psychology. (2) He repeatedly demonstrated the ability to formulate the discipline's central problems for the future and to propose innovative approaches to them. And (3) Allport's entire scholarly work presents a consistent, seamless and forceful perspective. These three points are then applied to his classic work The Nature of Prejudice. Though it was his most explicit attempt to influence public opinion, this famous volume also is balanced, ahead of its time, and elegantly written. It has organized the study of prejudice over the last half century. The article concludes with an explanation in personal terms for why those who knew him remember him so warmly 30 long years after his death.     

The Advantages of Multilevel Approaches

Editors' introduction: Thomas F. Pettigrew was born and raised in tightlysegregated Richmond, Virginia in 1931. But his Scottish-immigrant family did not subscribe to the South's racist norms, and he identified with and had early positive contact with African Americans. As an undergraduate at the University of Virginia, he discovered that there was a discipline that studied and resisted racism. These formative experiences forged his career path in social psychology to study intergroup relations. As a student of Allport's, Pettigrew is widely recognized as having expanded personality-oriented perspectives on prejudice to include a more social, contextualized orientation ( Kimmel, 1986 ). In that same vein, he focuses his commentary on incorporating multiple levels of analysis as we integrate theory, research and practice on intergroup relations. He emphasizes the importance of macro-level—institutional and societal—contextualization of social psychological work. Pettigrew thoughtfully considers each article in the issue and contends that multiple level analyses, and incorporating the macro-level, are critical for theoretical and empirical progress as well as maximizing effectiveness of interventions .     

A Social Psychology of National and International Group Relations

This concluding article provides a framework for a social psychological analysis of intergroup conflict and conflict resolution. The framework highlights the individual and intergroup factors that shape the nature of perceptions of intergroup relations and group representations, and describes how these perceptions lead to cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses toward groups. Included in the framework are the metatheoretical, theoretical, and practical contributions of the articles in this issue toward understanding intergroup relations. The potential and responsibility of social psychologists to move beyond the laboratory to applied national and international issues is also discussed.     

Social Psychologists' Expertise in the Public Interest: Civilian Morale Research During World War II

By reviewing the careers of three prominent social psychologists, Floyd Henry Allport, Daniel Katz, and Rensis Likert, this article describes the theoretical and practical psychological expertise that American psychologists developed before, during, and after World War II and describes how this expertise resulted in significant gains for the field of social psychology. Prior to World War II, Allport, Katz, and Likert made pioneering contributions to understanding issues relevant to society, to the science of social psychology, and to methods of attitude measurement and poll design. In response to World War II, each of the three pursued research topics more immediately connected to the war effort. Similar to other prominent social psychologists, Allport, Katz, and Likert were able to parlay their prewar reputations into significant, high-level roles in the service of the World War II effort. In turn, these successes helped to lay the foundation for a postwar boom in social psychology that had implications for training in and research on social psychology. Nonetheless, social psychology's and society's utilization of the knowledge gained during World War II appears to have been less than optimal.     

"Mapping the New Mental World Created by Radio": Media Messages, Cultural Politics, and Cantril and Allport's The Psychology of Radio

During the 1930s a number of interesting critiques of science and society emerged in the social sciences in general, and in psychology in particular. One example of this trend is The Psychology of Radio (1935), authored by Harvard psychologist Gordon Allport and his former student Hadley Cantril. The book, which was intended for both professional and lay audiences, sought to open discussion on the effects of the pervasive presence of radio, and to throw into relief the political, cultural, and economic contexts in which this new form of mass communication was embedded.     

Bridging the Researcher-Practitioner Divide in Intergroup Relations

Editors' introduction: Walter Stephan's interest in intergroup relations grew from his early involvement in intercultural relations. He spent substantial time in Latin America as well as Vietnam during his college years. These experiences influenced his choice to study social psychology at the University of Minnesota. His first foray into intergroup relations came with his move to Austin, Texas, in 1971. A Court mandate ordered schools to be desegregated, and Stephan examined the effects of school desegregation there on students' self-esteem and intergroup attitudes. His field research on the effects of desegregation as well as classroom interventions to improve intergroup relations was complemented by his laboratory research on intergroup biases, intergroup threat, intergroup anxiety, and empathy. Stephan brings this lifetime of involvement in both basic and applied research, and deep concern for effective practice and humanistic philosophy, to his commentary. He opens the commentaries with an elucidation of the difficulties in, and benefits of, the central thrust of this volume: the researcher-practitioner collaboration. He paints portraits of practitioners, researchers, and practitioner-researchers, and classifies articles in this issue accordingly. He notes the difficulties among the various parties interested in improving intergroup relations, spanning from simple lack of knowledge to lack of contact to lack of meaningful ways to interact. However, potential benefits of collaboration are abundant for all parties, and Stephan proposes a number of ways in which such partnerships could be actualized.     

Introduction Are We Ready to Translate Research Into Programs?

There is enough basic research on social cognition, developmental psychology,and peer relations as they relate to prejudice, discrimination, and stereotyping to address program development and evaluation. At the same time, there are enough race relations programs being developed and implemented to inform basic research on prejudice. This issue brings together articles on the interface between basic research and programs on prejudice. The articles focus onspecific programs such as affirmative action, multicultural and bilingual education, cooperative learning, social-cognitive skills training, and bystander interventions. This introductory article provides an overview of the goals and implications of the issue.     

Viewing Intergroup Relations in Europe through Allport's Lens Model of Prejudice

This article employs Allport's (1954) lens model of the causes of prejudice to analyze the articles in this issue of the Journal of Social Issues . The lens model specifies that historical, socio cultural, personality, and situational factors contribute to prejudice. The articles in this issue examine a number of variables at each of these levels of analysis, and many employ multilevel designs in which variables at more than one level are examined within the same study. Suggestions for future research on intergroup relations in Europe are offered including conducting more comparative and multilevel studies and creating comprehensive theories that integrate different levels of analysis. Some implications of the findings of these studies for intergroup relations programs are also discussed.     

由心至身:阶层影响身体的社会心理机制

本研究应用2010年中国综合社会调查(CGSS2010)数据分析身体健康与社会阶层的关系及其社会心理机制。在区分身体健康和心理健康的基础上,整合社会学和心理学相关理智资源,将在社会科学领域中越来越具有理论意义的身体研究延伸至经验研究层面。研究表明,个体身体的健康程度在某种程度上是社会阶层在个体身上印刻的结果,而这种印刻过程是通过阶层认同、群际伤害、习得性无助和情感支持等心理过程得以达成。     

The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?

Allport (1954) recognized that attachment to one's ingroups does not necessarily require hostility toward outgroups. Yet the prevailing approach to the study of ethnocentrism, ingroup bias, and prejudice presumes that ingroup love and outgroup hate are reciprocally related. Findings from both cross-cultural research and laboratory experiments support the alternative view that ingroup identification is independent of negative attitudes toward outgroups and that much ingroup bias and intergroup discrimination is motivated by preferential treatment of ingroup members rather than direct hostility toward outgroup members. Thus to understand the roots of prejudice and discrimination requires first of all a better understanding of the functions that ingroup formation and identification serve for human beings. This article reviews research and theory on the motivations for maintenance of ingroup boundaries and the implications of ingroup boundary protection for intergroup relations, conflict, and conflict prevention.     

Prejudice as Group Position: Microfoundations of a Sociological Approach to Racism and Race Relations

This research integrates and elaborates the basic premises of Blumer's group position theory of prejudice. It does so in order to make explicit, more fully integrated, and empirically pliable the theoretical foundations of a sociological analysis of the nature of racial prejudice. In so doing, the research identifies important areas of agreement between Gordon Allport's approach to prejudice and that of Blumer. Blumer neither provided a full synthetic statement of his several major pieces on prejudice nor pursued sustained empirical research in the area. Hence, the present article (1) identifies the core assumptions of the group position model, (2) summarizes a recent line of empirical work examining claims embedded in the group position approach, (3) specifies how this approach differs from other closely related approaches, and (4) identifies major tasks for future theoretical and empirical work.     

Allport's Legacy and the Situational Press of Stereotypes

This article focuses on two aspects of Allport's (1954) investigation of the psychology of being a target of prejudice. Whereas most researchers in this area view Allport as an expectancy theorist, we revisit another aspect of Allport's theory: the situational threat posed by negative stereotypes. First, we examine this issue, as it applies to the academic underachievement of negatively stereotyped groups, by contrasting the situational threat posed by stereotypes with traditional and current expectancy-oriented conceptions. Second, we show that stereotypes do not appear to affect self-expectations; instead, they appear to foster a climate of mistrust that results in depressed performance. Finally, we discuss how interventions that ameliorate the climate of mistrust, such as the presence of educators who are competent minority group members, tend to raise levels of performance.     

A Psychology of Immigration

The discipline of psychology has much to contribute to our understanding of immigrants and the process of immigration. A framework is proposed that lays out two complementary domains of psychological research, both rooted in contextual factors, and both leading to policy and program development. The first (acculturation) stems from research in anthropology and is now a central part of cross- cultural psychology; the second (intergroup relations) stems from sociology and is now a core feature of social psychology. Both domains are concerned with two fundamental issues that face immigrants and the society of settlement: maintenance of group characteristics and contact between groups. The intersection of these issues creates an intercultural space, within which members of both groups develop their cultural boundaries and social relationships. A case is made for the benefits of integration as a strategy for immigrants and for multiculturalism as a policy for the larger society. The articles in this issue are then discussed in relation to these conceptual frameworks and empirical findings.     

The Interdependence of Israeli and Palestinian National Identities: The Role of the Other in Existential Conflicts

The interactions between identity groups engaged in a protracted conflict lack the conditions postulated by Gordon Allport in The Nature of Prejudice (1954) as necessary if contact is to reduce intergroup prejudice. The article examines the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from this perspective. After summarizing the history of the conflict, it proposes that a long-term resolution of the conflict requires development of a transcendent identity for the two peoples that does not threaten the particularistic identity of each. The nature of the conflict, however, impedes the development of a transcendent identity by creating a state of negative interdependence between the two identities such that asserting one group's identity requires negating the identity of the other. The resulting threat to each group's identity is further exacerbated by the fact that each side perceives the other as a source of some of its own negative identity elements, especially a view of the self as victim and as victimizer. The article concludes with a discussion of ways of over-coming the negative interdependence of the two identities by drawing on some of the positive elements in the relationship, most notably the positive interdependence between the two groups that exists in reality. Problem-solving workshops represent one setting for equal-status interactions that provide the parties the opportunity to "negotiate" their identities and to find ways of accommodating the identity of the other in their own identity.     

Horizontal Hostility; Relations Between Similar Minority Groups

Two studies were conducted to examine the relations between similar minority groups. We predicted that minority group members would show horizontal hostility, a form of prejudice, against members of a similar, but more mainstream, minority group. The results of both studies confirmed this hypothesis. In Study 1, members of 3 Jewish congregations (reform, conservative, orthodox) showed prejudice against a member of a similar but slightly more secular congregation. In Study 2, members of a college varsity soccer team showed prejudice against junior varsity players. We conclude by suggesting that horizontal hostility is the result of social changes since Allport (1954) wrote The Nature of Prejudice. Members of minority groups value their minority social identity, even when the group is stigmatized. The positive value of minority social identity causes group members to look down on members of similar, more mainstream groups.     

Collective Action—and Then What?

Two aspects of the social psychology of collective action are of particular interest to social movement organizers and activists: how to motivate people to engage in collective action, and how to use collective action to create social change. The second question remains almost untouched within social psychology. The present article delineates research from political science and sociology concerning variables that moderate the effectiveness of collective action and maps these variables against intergroup research. Within intergroup social psychology, there is a theoretical literature on what needs to be done to achieve change (e.g., changing identification, social norms, or perceptions of legitimacy, stability, permeability). The article considers possible testable hypotheses concerning the outcomes of collective action which can be derived from intergroup research and from the synthesis of the three disciplines. For theoreticians and practitioners alike, a program of research which addresses the social-psychological outcomes of collective action and links these to identities, norms, intentions, and support for social change in bystanders, protagonists, and opponents has a great deal of interest.     

Understanding Bias toward Latinos: Discrimination, Dimensions of Difference, and Experience of Exclusion

White–Black relations have historically been the defining form of intergroup relations in the study of prejudice and discrimination. The present article suggests that there are limitations to applying this model to understanding bias toward other groups and proposes that a comprehensive view of the dynamics of the Anglos' bias toward Latinos requires consideration of the distinctive elements of this form of intergroup relations. In four empirical studies, we experimentally document discrimination against Latinos (Study 1), explore the potential dimensions that underlie bias against Latinos (Study 2), and examine the effect of a particular social identity cue, accentedness, on perceptions of acceptance and belongingness of Latinos and members of other groups (Studies 3 and 4). These studies consider general processes of prejudice and identify how particular facets of bias against Latinos can shape their experiences and, taken together, illustrate how understanding bias against Latinos can reciprocally inform contemporary theories of prejudice.