Explaining intergroup differentiation in an industrial organization

Abstract

We report a study of intergroup relations in a paper factory in which we examine the utility of three social‐psychological approaches: realistic conflict theory, the contact hypothesis and social identity theory. A sample of 177 shop floor workers from five different departments was interviewed. From them, measures of intergroup differentiation, perceived intergroup conflict, amount of intergroup contact, and strength of workgroup identification were obtained. The latter was assessed using a new scale of group identification developed for this study. Reliability and validity data for this scale are reported. Using multiple regression analyses we attempt to explain variance in respondents' intergroup differentiation using the other measures as predictor variables. The most powerful and reliable predictor was perceived conflict which, as expected, was positively correlated with differentiation. Less consistent was amount of contact which was negatively but only weakly associated with differentiation. Strength of group identification, while generally showing a positive correlation with differentiation as predicted, was also only a weak and inconsistent predictor variable. Noting that these results confirm findings from other studies we discuss their theoretical implications.

Doing gender differently—The interplay of strength of gender identification and content of gender identity in predicting women's endorsement of sexist beliefs

“…Identification Identification with the gender in-group was measured with four items developed by Brown, Condor, Mathews, Wade, and Williams (1986; ''I identify with the group of women''), Cameron (2004; ''I feel strong ties to other women''; ''Overall, being a woman is an important part of my self-image''), and Haslam, Oakes, Reynolds, and Turner (1999; ''Being a woman is important for me''). Internal consistency was satisfactory (a ¼ .82).…”

Escala Trifatorial da Identidade Social (ETIS): Evidências de sua Adequação Psicométrica

“…Os estudos prévios mostraram que a identidade social tem sido mensurada por diferentes instrumentos (Brown et al, 1986;Cameron, 2004;Nascimento et al, 2015;Obst & White, 2005). No entanto, parte desses instrumentos de medida não apresentaram uma teoria que servisse de base para sua construção ou não levaram em consideração a dimensionalidade do construto, como, por exemplo, a escala de identidade de grupo de Brown et al (1986).…”

“…Os itens da Escala de Identificação Social foram constituídos com base: em estudos de Cameron e Lalonde (2001), que desenvolveram uma escala de 28 itens de identificação social, derivados de diferenças de gênero; nos itens de medidas de identidades sociais (Brown et al, 1986;Hinkle et al, 1989) e autoestima coletiva (Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992), bem como, em trabalho anterior sobre a identidade social de mulheres (Gurin & Markus, 1989;Gurin & Townsend, 1986).…”

“…No contexto internacional, a medida mais utilizada de identificação social foi desenvolvida por Brown et al (1986), denominada escala de identidade de grupo, cuja tendência é mostrar a identidade social com uma única dimensão, com resultados analíticos do fator denotando direcionalidade do item em vez de dimensionalidade do construto (Brown et al, 1986;Kelly, 1988;Obst & White, 2005). Evidências, entretanto, ocorrem no sentido de mensurar identidade social de forma multidimensional, com três fatores advindos da TIS, apresentando-se, assim, uma medida mais robusta, apropriada e útil (Cameron & Lalonde, 2001;Ellemers et al, 1999;Obst & White, 2005).…”

The Measurement of Stereotypes in the Evaluation of Interprofessional Education

“…It provides practical solutions to overcoming prejudice between different social groups and maintains that positive change in intergroup attitudes will be promoted through encouraging conflicting groups to interact with one another (Allport, 1979). However, interactions must be governed by set conditions which include that groups have common goals, are aware of group similarities and difference and that interactions take place within a positive and cooperative atmosphere (Brown et al, 1986;Hewstone & Brown, 1986;Barnes et al, 2000).…”