Intergroup relations the phenomena discussed here are

  • No School
  • AA 1
  • devan2307
  • 17

This preview shows page 7 - 9 out of 17 pages.

Intergroup Relations The phenomena discussed here are probably better known to psychologists, since they constitute the core of the social psychological study of intergroup relations. Although it may be difficult to distinguish this domain of immigration research from the large general literature on the topic, there are a few differentiat- ing features: First, the groups are usually culturally defined (including specific features of language, religion, status, and “race”), more than is the case for inter- group relations generally (where the focus is often on “minorities” or other generic categories, such as “Asians”). Second, immigrants are typically less familiar to the resident population, making more salient the well-established relationship between familiarity and attraction. For example, when holding specific cultural Psychology of Immigration 621
background constant, immigrants (compared to those born and raised in a particu- lar country) are usually rated less favorably (e.g., Berry & Kalin, 1995; Kalin, 1996). And third, immigrants are typically less similar to the resident population, making more salient the similarity-attraction relationships. In keeping with this, those who seek to assimilate and who undergo greater behavioral shifts (toward receiving society norms) may experience less discrimination (Mummendey & Wenzel, 1999). Ethnic stereotyping, ethnic attitudes, and ethnic prejudice can be studied with respect to both the receiving society and immigrants. Thus, as for studies of acculturation, mutual or reciprocal views need to be taken into account. Just as acculturation research tends to focus only on nondominant groups, however, intergroup relations research has been largely concerned with studying only domi- nant groups. In ethnic stereotype research there is a tradition of considering domi- nant groups’ views of others (heterostereotypes) and sometimes of themselves (autostereotypes); few studies, however, have examined the auto- and hetero- stereotypes held by the numerous nondominant groups in a reciprocal way. Brewer and Campbell (1976) did so, revealing a pattern of complex relationships, includ- ing universal ingroup favoritism, a widely shared hierarchy of outgroup accep- tance, and “balance” in dyadic attitudes (see also Berry & Kalin, 1979; Kalin & Berry, 1996). Such multigroup designs are of special importance in immigrant studies for two reasons. First, there is often competition among immigrant groups for favor and status in the receiving society; hence a complex network of attitudes is the essential research focus in such situations. Second, many countries now compete to attract immigrants; hence immigrants’ attitudes toward the receiving society are an essential counterpart to the attitudes held by the larger society toward them.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture