Premium
Conflict, what conflict? Evidence that playing down “conflict” can be a weapon of choice for high‐status groups
Author(s) -
Livingstone Andrew G.,
Sweetman Joseph,
Haslam S. Alexander
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
european journal of social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.609
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1099-0992
pISSN - 0046-2772
DOI - 10.1002/ejsp.2728
Subject(s) - outgroup , ingroups and outgroups , social psychology , group conflict , psychology , in group favoritism , social group , social identity theory
Three studies using pre‐existing (Studies 1 and 3) and minimal (Study 2) groups tested the hypothesis that ingroup status shapes whether “conflict’” with an outgroup is strategically acknowledged or downplayed. As predicted, high (vs. low) ingroup status led group members to downplay conflict, but only to an outgroup rather than ingroup audience (Studies 1 and 2; N s = 127 & 292), and only when the status difference was unstable (vs. stable) and the outgroup's action was perceived as illegitimate (Study 2). High‐status group members also collectively communicated with the outgroup in a manner designed to defuse conflict (Study 2). Survey data of industrial (manager–worker) relations further indicated that company managers (high‐status) characterized manager–worker relations as less conflictual than did workers (low‐status) in the same companies (Study 3; N = 24,661). Findings imply that high‐status groups play down conflict as a “benevolent” (but unacknowledged) means of maintaining intergroup status hierarchies.