Common-Group Identity And Intergroup Relations

Words: 1095
Pages: 5

Research indicated that intergroup relations can be appreciably enhanced through positive contact and cooperation between advantaged (majority) and disadvantaged (minority) group members (Glasford & Dovidio, 2011; Tropp & Pettigrew, 2005). However, a substantial number of studies have focused only on responses of the majority group towards the minority group (Tropp & Pettigrew, 2005, as cited in Glasford & Dovidio, 2011). Interestingly, Saguy and Chernyak-Hai’s (2012) recent study discovered that inducing commonality caused minority group members to be less likely to link adverse behavior by the majority to prejudice, due to an increased positive opinion of the hierarchy. Moreover, recent investigations on reducing intergroup bias and improving …show more content…
Thus, it is important to further comprehend the impact of dual (two self-relevant identities) versus common (one important) identity on intergroup relations within both majority and minority groups. In light of other research, the current investigation examined the impact of dual versus common identity on minority and majority group members’ perceptions of prejudice, and perceptions of other minority and majority group members in an Australian …show more content…
The results seem to indicate that ones’ perceptions of prejudice as being subtle may be attributed to the extent of discrimination an individual has experienced in their lives. In other words, a member of disadvantaged group may no longer perceive subtle prejudice because in light of harsher discrimination, subtle prejudice may be disregarded. In reference to ratings of faces, it is possible that due to the way Aboriginal Australian cultural identity has been represented in Australia, a common identity linked with being ‘white’ has become inherent in Australian people, thus influencing the results (Sibley & Barlow, 2009). Furthermore, the notion that perceptions of outgroup members may be related to the strength of an individual’s sense of national identity proposed by Devos and Banaji’s (2005) study supports these