Write an essay of 2000 words on the following:
Billig has evaluated Tajfel and Turner’s theorising of intergroup conﬂict as limited because of the emphasis placed on cognitive processes. Discuss Billig’s evaluation and assess his arguments for a discursive psychological approach.
The study of prejudice and intergroup conflict within social psychology became a priority in response to the experiences of genocide in the Second World War (Dixon, 2007, p.147). Examples of prejudice and the intergroup conflict are used in this essay to find out whether the statement given by Billig that the intergroup conflict mentioned (Tajfel and Turner, 1979) is limited or not because it emphasizes on the cognitive processes. By considering the examples of minimal group paradigm (MGP) studies done by Tajfel and Billig (1973) (cited Brown, 2007, p.146) and Potter and Reicher’s presentations of St Paul’s riots (Potter and Reicher, 1987 cited Phoenix, 2007, p.115-117), it will be shown that a discursive approach to intergroup conflict recognises the powerful role of modern myths and discourses in the maintenance of violence and it is preferable than the cognitive approaches. In his studies of MGP, Tajfel outlined a social cognitive approach to the study of ‘prejudice’ and also refuted the ‘blood-and-guts’ approach. Tajfel proposed that social psychology is not value free; this essay examines the moral and political view of ‘Cognitive aspects’ and also the gaps in his approach to the study of prejudice.
There are two researched explanations of prejudice. They are the Realistic conflict theory and the Social identity theory.
Tajfel and Turner (1979), did a research on groups in which two groups were placed in a competitive situation where each group was aware that they can only achieve a certain goal when members of the group work together and against the other group, a conflict then raised between them. They were given rewards for working against the other group. Intergroup bias and negativity developed due to competition. To reduce this conflict, a higher reward was set for the groups to work together. This theory of prejudice is known as the Realistic Conflict theory.
Sherif (1966) carried out the most famous and successful study ever conducted on intergroup conflict to support the realistic conflict theory. This experiment was given the name of ‘Robbers Cave’ experiment in which 24 boys of 12 years of age were taken on a summer camp. These boys were then placed randomly into two groups. During the first week, both groups worked on their own within their group. In the second week, they were introduced to the out-group. They weren’t even informed about any sort of competition between the two groups, hatred was already developed towards the out-group and friendliness towards the in-group. Both groups were given different names and the usual differences. A common and higher goal was set to reduce the conflict between two groups. To achieve the goal, both groups had to work with each other rather than working against each other in the competition.
To support this theory, Tajfel (1969) conducted a research study to find out how easily people can discriminate against each others that they perceive to be in a different group. The subjects were classified randomly as members of two non-overlapping groups. There was no interaction between the subjects and the subjects had to allocate points, which could later be converted to money to both their in-group and out-group. It was noticed that the subjects allocated more points to their own groups showing in-group favouritism. Despite of giving more points to the in-group, the in-group was losing when it came to summing up the points altogether. This study was known as the ‘Minimal Group Paradigm’ to prejudice. In this experiment, there was no interaction between the subjects, no conflict of interest and also there was no hatred between the groups. Tajfel concluded that these...
References: Billig, M. and Tajfel, H. (1973) ‘Social categorisation and similarity in intergroup behaviour’, European Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 3, pp. 37–52.
Billig, M. (1985) ‘Prejudice, categorization and particularization: from a perceptual to a rhetorical approach’, European Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 15, pp. 79–103.
Billig, M. (1987) ‘Arguing and thinkin’, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Billig, M. (1996) ‘Remembering the background of social identity theory’ in Robinson, (ed.)(1996).
Billig, M. (2002) ‘Henri Tajfel’s “Cognitive aspects of prejudice” and the
Psychology of bigotry’, British Journal of Social Psychology, vol
Billig, M. (2005) Laughter and Ridicule: Towards a Social Critique of Humour,
Brown, R. (2000) ‘Social identity theory: past achievements, current problems
and future challenges’, European Journal of Social Psychology, vol
Brown, S.D. (2007) ‘Intergroup processes: social identity theory’ in Langdridge, D. and Taylor, S. (eds) ‘Critical Readings in Social Psychology’, Maidenhead, Open University Press/Milton Keynes, The Open University.
Dixon, J. (2007) ‘Prejudice, conflict and conflict reduction’ in Hollway, W., Lucey, H. and Phoenix, A. (eds) Social Psychology Matters, Maidenhead, Open University Press/Milton Keynes, The Open University.
Drury, J., Stott, C.J. and Farsides, T. (2003) ‘The role of police perceptions and
practices in the development of “public disorder”’, Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, vol. 33, pp. 1480–500.
Edwards, D. (1999) ‘Emotion discourse’, Cultural Psychology, vol. 5,
Heritage, J. and Atkinson, J.M. (1984) ‘Introduction’ in Atkinson, J.M. and Heritage, J. (eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press.
Hopkins, N. and Kahani-Hopkins, V. (2006) ‘Minority theories of intergroup relations and intergroup contact: conceptualising “Islamaphobia” and the opportunities for social change’, British Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 45, pp. 245–64.
Mandel, D. R. (1998) ‘The obedience alibi: Milgram’s account of the Holocaust reconsidered’. Analyse und Kritik, vol. 20, pp. 74–94.
Mandel, D. R. (2001) ‘Instigators of genocide: Examining Hitler from a social psychological perspective. In L. S. Newman & R. Erber (Eds.), What social psychology can tell us about the Holocaust’. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Parkinson, B. (2007) ‘Emotion’ in Hollway, W., Lucey, H. and Phoenix, A. (eds) Social Psychology Matters, Maidenhead, Open University Press/Milton Keynes, The Open University.
Phoenix, A. (2007) ‘Intragroup processes: entatitivity’ in Langdridge, D. and Taylor, S. (eds) ‘Critical Readings in Social Psychology’, Maidenhead, Open University Press/Milton Keynes, The Open University.
Potter, J. and Reicher, S. (1987) ‘Discourses of community and conﬂict: the
organization of social categories in accounts of a “riot”’, British Journal of
Reicher, S.D. (1987) ‘Crowd behaviour as social action’ in Turner, Hogg,
Oakes, Reicher, and Wetherell (eds) (1987).
Sherif, M. (1966) In Common Predicament: Social Psychology of Intergroup
Conﬂict and Cooperation, Boston, MA, Houghton-Mifﬂin.
Tajfel, H. (1969) ‘Cognitive aspects of prejudice’, Journal of Social Issues, vol.
Tajfel, H. and Turner, J. (1979) ‘An integrative theory of intergroup conﬂict’ in
Tajfel, H. (1981) Human Groups and Social Categories, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document