Abstract
Two experiments investigated the role of intragroup communication in intergroup conflict (de-)escalation. Experiment 1 examined the effects of intragroup communication (vs. individual thought) and anticipated face-to-face intergroup contact (vs. no anticipated face-to-face intergroup contact). The group discussions of stigmatized group members who anticipated face-to-face intergroup contact revolved more around intergroup hostility. This boosted ingroup identification and increased social creativity but also led to steeling (a hardening of perceived intergroup relations). In Experiment 2, new participants listened to the taped group discussions. The discussions of groups anticipating face-to-face intergroup contact evoked more intergroup anxiety-related discomfort than discussions of groups not anticipating face-to-face intergroup encounters. Together, these results support the idea that steeling is a defensive reaction to prepare for an anxiety-arousing intergroup confrontation. Although steeling is also associated with positive consequences such as increased ingroup solidarity and social creativity, this hardened stance may be an obstacle to conflict de-escalation.
Highlights
The term intergroup conflict instills the image of a clash between groups, paradoxically conflict flourishes when there is a lack of contact and groups do not interact [1]
We hypothesized that intragroup communication while anticipating intergroup contact 1) leads group members to discuss personal experiences with ingroup-directed hostility and 2) activates negative meta-stereotypes, both of which consequentially result in 3) steeling against anticipated hostility
We expected that listening to groups anticipating face-to-face intergroup contact would evoke more discomfort in a separate sample of participants belonging to the same ingroup than listening to ingroup members discussing the outgroup without anticipating direct intergroup contact
Summary
The term intergroup conflict instills the image of a clash between groups, paradoxically conflict flourishes when there is a lack of contact and groups do not interact [1]. We propose that intragroup processes can help explain this phenomenon. Intragroup communication can shape intergroup perceptions, and may be essential in conflict (de)escalation. The current research investigated how intergroup perceptions evolved in small groups that talked among each other about an anticipated face-to-face intergroup contact situation. In conflict situations where the outgroup holds negative views about the ingroup, such anticipation of contact may be threatening. We hypothesized that intragroup discussion may cause shared construal of anticipated contact as hostile but simultaneously offers members of stigmatized groups an opportunity to steel themselves in anticipation.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
