Group conflict: concept, essence of the issue, who is to blame and what to do

Definition

Group conflict is a confrontation between parties with different interests, aspirations and goals. Subjects of conflict are participants of two or more groups. People tend to unite to defend their interests and value systems. Like-minded people help you understand that there are people in this world who share and support the individual’s value system. What is the object of the conflict? Disputes between groups vary. People defend their interests, ideological values ​​and personal benefits. Groups compete for status, power, and resources. Such a struggle has taken place between people from time immemorial.

What is conflict? This is a confrontation between two groups. Conflict is a discrepancy in interests that leads to serious disagreements between people. Most often, such opposition is accompanied by a strong emotional upsurge. And as a rule, the emotions are very negative.

Prospects[edit]

Psychoanalysis[edit]

Lacan saw the roots of intragroup aggression in regression to the "narcissistic moment in the subject", emphasizing "aggression included in the effects of any regression, any arrested development, a complete abandonment of the typical development of the subject." [36] Neville Symington also saw narcissism as a key element of group conflict, highlighting "organizations so riven by narcissistic currents that ... little creativity has been done." [37] Such settings open the way to "many egoistic instinct-feelings, such as the desire to dominate and humiliate one's fellow man, the love of conflict - your courage and strength against mine - the satisfaction of being the object of jealousy, the pleasures derived from cunning, deceit and concealment." [38] Fisher (2012) distinguished between two forms of intragroup conflict in organizations. In the "reparative" form, the paranoid-schizoid "splitting" can be transformed by scapegoating the dynamic to produce reparative ("depressive") intragroup relations. in a contrasting “perverted” form, intragroup trauma causes a paranoid-schizoid functioning fragment, resulting in intersubjective “entanglement” with sadomasochistic dynamics. [39]

However, psychoanalysts themselves have not been able to escape the limitations of group conflict: "Envy, rivalry, conflicts for power, the formation of small groups leading to discord and intrigue are a given" in the psychoanalytic world, for example, with institutions "caught up in factionalism... struggle between inputs and outputs." [40]

Girard [edit]

René Girard considered "collective violence sacred... [as] the great remedy

from public life." [41] He viewed violence directed against a group scapegoat as "the absorption of all the internal tensions, hostilities and rivalries accumulated within the community... a deliberate act of collective displacement." [42]

His view parallels the Freudian approach based on Totem and Taboo

, who believes that "disturbance... lies at the root of the higher complexity to which the kingdom of civilization owes its development." [43] Freud considered violence to be the root of social bonds - "it is no longer the violence of the individual who predominates, but the violence of the community" [44] - and therefore "politics based on wrongdoing... the contract establishes corporate virtue as a refuge from individual sin." [45]

Thus, Girard concluded that regression and “the dissolution of differences promote the spread of double binds ... lead to the disintegration of social institutions” [46], in order to reveal the group conflict hidden at their core.

Kinds

Conflicts are different. There are three main types:

1. Open. People do not hide their emotions and feelings from others. They openly declare their rights and desires. The collective mind helps each individual feel their importance. A group of like-minded people can resist another group longer. One individual is unable to carry on a long struggle without moral support. Such conflicts are resolved quickly, since they are too obvious and impossible to ignore.
2. Hidden. A group of people will not always state their demands openly. Often people try to veil their demands so that they sound more censorious and tactful. Such conflicts can often be seen in an enterprise. Dissatisfied employees are afraid to immediately voice their dissatisfaction. They will hide their true intentions under various pretexts. A hidden conflict cannot be eliminated quickly if its cause is not immediately identified.
3. Potential. A group conflict that is not too serious at the moment can simmer for years. And it will flare up when circumstances contribute to strengthening the group’s position.

Intragroup conflict, its causes and consequences, pros and cons

Intragroup conflict

– this is a clash between group members (between the leader and the team, between the individual and the group)

Causes of conflicts

could also be:

a) unclear distribution of rights and responsibilities of group members;

b) incorrect actions of one or more group members that damage the common cause or disrupt the achievement of a common group goal;

c) situational incompatibility of two or more group members, manifested in the discrepancy between the actions of one group member and the expectations, values, and life rules of the other (others);

d) differences in opinions, assessments, judgments of certain group members;

e) personal hostility of one group member to another, preventing their cooperation and achievement of a common goal;

f) envy of one or more members of a group towards the success, prestige, authority of another, more successful member of the same group in some respect;

g) psychological incompatibility of some group members.

Consequences:

1) Formation of subgroups. This phenomenon is observed especially in cases where conflict arises between two significant members of the group. Dividing into two subgroups and discreetly separating goals and spheres of influence can relieve—at least temporarily—the tension. 2) Removal of dissenting members. The forced or spontaneous removal of one or more members who are disunited or constitute a small minority can also ease tension in the group resulting from conflict between its members. 3) Choosing a “scapegoat”. Conflict may be accompanied by aggressive release of tension directed at one person or minority who are considered to be responsible for the difficulties encountered. 4) Organizational changes in the group.

Pros:

1) conflict accelerates the process of self-awareness;

2) under its influence, a certain set of values ​​is approved and confirmed;

3) leads to the unification of like-minded people;

4) promotes detente and pushes other, unimportant conflicts into the background;

5) promotes prioritization;

6) thanks to it, attention is drawn to dissatisfaction or proposals that need discussion;

7) leads to the emergence of working contacts with other people and groups;

The negative impact of conflict often manifests itself in the following:

1) instead of a carefully considered response, it leads to quick action;

2) as a result of the conflict, the parties’ trust in each other is undermined;

3) causes disunity among those who need or even strive for unity;

4) the conflict tends to deepen and expand;

Psychology of large social groups.

Large groups are structurally and functionally organized. They should not be mixed with mass communities (youth, teenagers, women, men, professional communities).

Socio-psychological regulators of the life activity of large groups - group consciousness, customs and traditions

.
In each large group, a group consciousness (party, class, national), a system of group ideals, value orientations, and emotional preferences are formed. The means of mass communication of large groups shape public opinion
- group aspirations and feelings;
conduct propaganda, encouraging group members to certain value orientations and actions. The main social value is the public good
.

Among the diversity of large social groups, two of them are subjects of the historical process - ethnic groups and classes.

The subjects of mass non-group behavior are the public and the masses. Public

- a large group of people with common episodic interests, subject to a single emotional-conscious regulation with the help of generally significant objects of attention (meeting participants, demonstrations, lecture listeners, members of cultural societies).
Various extreme events can cause its emotional-impulsive regulation based on mental infection. A mass
is a collection of a large number of people who make up an amorphous formation, who usually do not have direct contacts, but are united by common stable interests.

Solutions

How to resolve the conflict? There are two solutions that help resolve problems.

1. Antagonistic. Group conflict in this case will be resolved until one group wins. This method is considered very tough. The opposing sides will use any methods in order to defeat the enemy. In this case, the saying “the ends justify the means” fits perfectly. The affected group will dislike the winner and immediately try to take revenge.
2. Compromise. The conflict will develop without any consequences. Groups of people will find a solution to a problem that will satisfy both opposing sides. This method of eliminating problems is the most reasonable, since relations between people do not deteriorate, because both opposing groups achieve partial satisfaction of their demands.

Functions

Conflicts are an integral part of any relationship. Therefore, it should not be surprising that they have both positive and negative functions.

• Uniting like-minded people. Collective intelligence helps you quickly achieve your goals. People bond and function well as a group. United by common interests, they can create something new, find interesting solutions to problems and quickly achieve their goals.
• Discharge tension. Any misunderstanding leads to a tense atmosphere in the group. People cannot think soberly because their nervous system is under tension. Successful conflict resolution helps a person release their emotions and feel better.
• Emotional costs. People who are in conflict with someone injure their nervous system. They cannot focus on anything other than their problems. And until the conflict is resolved, they will be in limbo.

Links[edit]

1. Sigmund Freud, Civilization, Society and Religion
   (PFL 12) p. 353
2. Rusch, H.; Gavrilets, S. (2017). "The Logic of Animal Intergroup Conflict: A Review." Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization
   . DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2017.05.004.
3. Böhm, R.; Rusch, H.; Baron, B. (2018). "The Psychology of Intergroup Conflict: A Review of Theories and Measures." Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization
   . DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2018.01.020.
4. Jump up
   ↑ Desmond Morris,
   The Naked Ape Trilogy
   (1994) p. 251
5. R. D. Laing, The Politics of Experience
   (1984) p. 64
6. Jump up
   ↑ Forsyth, D. R. (2009).
   Group dynamics
   (5th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
7. Eliot R. Smith / Diane M. Mackie, Social Psychology
   (2007) p. 515
8. Smith/Mackie, p. 515
9. Smith/Mackie, p. 498
10. Jump up
    ↑ Desmond Morris,
    The Naked Ape Trilogy
    (1994) p. 255
11. R. Skinner / J. Cleese, Families and How to Survive Them
    (1993) p. 135
12. Sigmund Freud, Civilization, Society and Religion
    (PFL 12) p. 305
13. Morris, page 254
14. ^ B s d e e Eidelson, R. J., & Eidelson, S. O. (2003). "Dangerous Ideas: Five Beliefs That Drive Groups to Conflict." American psychologist
    . Vol. 58. No. 3, 182–192.
15. Gonen, J. Y. The Roots of Nazi Psychology: Hitler's Utopian Barbarism
    . Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.
16. Su, D. W., Bingham, R. P., Porche-Berca, L., & Vasquez, M. (1999). Diversifying psychology: A multicultural revolution. American Psychologist, 1061–1069.
17. Su, D. W., Bingham, R. P., Porche-Berca, L., & Vasquez, M. (1999). "Diversifying Psychology: A Multicultural Revolution." American psychologist
    . 1061–1069.
18. Su, D. W., Bingham, R. P., Porche-Berca, L., & Vasquez, M. (1999). Diversifying psychology: A multicultural revolution. American psychologist
    . 1061–1069.
19. Jump up
    ↑ Volkan, V. D. (1999).
    "Psychoanalysis and Diplomacy: Part 1. Individual and Large Group Identity." Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Research
    . pp. 29–55.
20. Erikson, E. H. Childhood and Society
    . New York: Norton.
21. Kramer, R. M.; Messick, D. M. (1998). Getting along with a little help from our enemies: Collective paranoia and its role in intergroup relations. In: Intergroup cognition and intergroup behavior. K. Sedikides, J. Schopler and K. A. Insko (eds.)
    . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 233–255.
22. Gamson, W. A. ​​(1995). Construction of a social process. In H. Johnston and B. Klandermans (eds.), Social Movements and Culture
    . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. pp. 85–106.
23. ↑
    Horowitz, David, (2001). Ethnic Groups in Conflict, updated edition with new preface, 2nd edition, University of California Press, pp. 161-175
24. Houle, Cyril O. (1989). Boards: Their Character and Education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 1-55542-157-1.
25. Ilgen, D. R.; Mitchell, T. R.; Fredrickson, J. W. (1981). "Bad Performers: Feedback from Managers and Subordinates." Organizational Behavior and Human Performance
    .
    27
    (3):386–410.
26. Amin Ghaziani, Dividends of Dissent
    (2008) pp. 15–20
27. R. Skinner / J. Cleese, Families and How to Survive Them
    (1994) p. 132–3
28. Engleberg, Isa N.; Wynn, Dianna R. (2007) (in English). group work 175–193 (4th ed.). Boston New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.
29. Smith/Mackie, p. 448
30. ↑
    Randy Hodson,
    Dignity at Work
    (2001) p. 215 and p. 218
31. ^ ab Aamodt, M. G. (2016) Industrial/Organizational Psychology: An Applied Approach.
    Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, 489.
32. Moreland, R. L. & Levine, J. M. (1982). Socialization in small groups: Temporal changes in individual-group relations. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 15, 137-192.
33. Bernard, Oladosu. "Organizational Conflict: Causes, Consequences, and Remedies" (PDF). semanticsholar.org
    . International Journal of Academic Research in Economics and Management.
34. Wright, S. C., Tropp, L. R., & Mazziotta, A. (2017). Contact between groups, peace and conflict. Peace and Conflict: A Journal of Peace Psychology, 23, 207-209.
35. Omisore, Bernard. "Organizational Conflict: Causes, Consequences, and Remedies" (PDF). semanticsholar.org
    . International Journal of Academic Research in Economics and Management.
36. Jacques Lacan, Ecrits: Choice
    (1997) p. 24
37. Neville Symington, Narcissism: A New Theory
    (1993) p. 10
38. Jump up
    ↑ Clemens J. France, in J. Halliday/P. Fuller, editors,
    The Psychology of Gambling
    (1974), p. 151
39. Fisher, Michael Daniel (September 28, 2012). "Organizational Turbulence, Challenges, and Trauma: Theorizing Mental Health Collapse." Organizational Studies
    .
    33
    (9):1153–1173. DOI: 10.1177/0170840612448155.
40. Janet Malcolm, Psychoanalysis: The Impossible Profession
    (1988) p. 106 and p. 65
41. Girard, Job
    (1987) b. 29 and page 150
42. Girard, Violence and Sacred
    (1977) b. 7
43. Jacques Lacan, The Ethics of Psychoanalysis
    (London, 1992) p. 6
44. Freud, page 351
45. Norman Brown, John O'Neill, Sociology as the Leather Trade
    (1972), p. 47
46. ↑
    Girard,
    Violence and the Sacred,
    pp. 188 and pp. 127
47. J. Boardman et al. The Oxford History of the Classical World
    (1991) p. 460
48. Ed. P. Alexandra, William Shakespeare: The Complete Works
    (1962), p. 544
49. G. M. Trevelyan, Peace and Protestant Continuity
    (1965) p. 306

Stages

Each conflict goes through several stages of development from its inception to its successful resolution.

• A problem occurs. At the first stage, the essence of the issue is revealed, and a group of people tries to achieve their goals using adequate methods. Negotiations are conducted, the opinions of the parties are revealed, and opponents appear.
• Open conflict. If at the first stage it is not possible to reach a common opinion, then a cold or open war ensues. Groups discuss in a raised voice, get irritated and try in every possible way to achieve what they want.
• Building relationships. After resolving a conflict, it is not always possible to quickly establish relationships between members of different groups. If a specific group wins, then opponents may harbor resentment, which will become a reason for a new conflict. Therefore, when resolving any controversial issue, you need to find a compromise.

Causes

The sources of conflict in any group are the same. People want to achieve their goals, so they unite. What most often causes conflict?

• Social inequality. It just so happens that some people are always in a privileged position. Such people are smart, educated and wealthy. They do not want to let people with less income into their circle. This state of affairs does not suit the oppressed. They want a better life and an increase in their status.
• Misunderstanding. Each person is free to interpret events based on his own development, intelligence and morality. It is never possible to look at the same problem in the same way. Therefore, conflicts arise that divide society into several parts.
• Power struggle. No matter how good the government is, there will always be dissatisfied people. Who is to blame and what to do in such a situation, everyone decides for themselves. Most often, people are divided into groups. Some support the current order of things, while others want to change management, believing that life will be better with a change in power.
• Generation difference. People of the younger generation are liberals, and older members of society are most often conservatives. Differences in views and interests often cause conflicts.

Causes of conflicts

When analyzing conflicts, it is necessary to take into account their causes. Let us indicate the main types:

• the individual's expectations contradict the group's expectations, i.e. the behavior of one person does not meet the norms of the group;
• contradictions between an individual and a group in goals, values, interests, etc.;
• the individual struggles to increase his personal status and for a position as a leader;
• identification of the real and imaginary culprit of failures at work;
• the leader is incompetent in managing the group.

Is it still difficult? Our experts will help you figure it out All services Problem solving from 1 day / from 150 rubles Coursework from 5 days / from 1800 rubles Abstract from 1 day / from 700 rubles
Group conflicts are nothing more than a confrontation in which at least one of the parties is represented by a small social group.

Such confrontation arises on the basis of a clash of opposing group motives. Based on the above, two main types of group conflicts can be distinguished: “person-group” conflict and “group-group” conflict.

Each of the identified types of group conflicts has its own specifics according to its main characteristics.

Conflict "person - group"

Conflicts between an individual and a group arise in the environment of group relationships and have certain features that should be taken into account in managing these conflicts.

The first feature is related to the structure of such a conflict. The subject in it, on the one hand, is the individual, and on the other, the group. Therefore, the conflict interaction here occurs on the basis of a collision of personal and group motives, and the images of the conflict situation are presented by the first subject in individual views and assessments, and by the second - in group ones.

The second feature reflects the specific causes of the conflict in question. And such reasons are directly related to the position of the individual in the group, which is characterized by such concepts as “position”, “status”, “internal attitude”, “role”, “group norms”.

Position is the official position of an individual in a group, determined by position.

Status is the real position of an individual in the system of intragroup relations, the degree of his authority. Status can be high, medium and low.

Internal attitude is a person’s subjective perception of his status in a group.

A role is a normatively defined or collectively approved pattern of individual behavior in a group.

Group norms are general rules of behavior that all members of the group adhere to.

The causes of conflicts that arise between an individual and a group are always connected:

• a) in violation of role expectations;
• b) with the inadequacy of the internal attitude to the status of the individual (especially conflict between the individual and the group is observed when his internal attitude is overestimated)
• c) in violation of group norms.

The third feature is reflected in the forms of manifestation of this conflict. These forms can be: the use of group sanctions; significant restriction or complete cessation of informal communication between group members and the conflicting party; sharp criticism of the conflicting person; euphoria on the part of the conflicting party, etc. Grishina V.N. Psychology of conflict. Page 113

Types of group conflicts

Any social group is a complex social, socio-psychological formation.

Formal and informal systems of relations can function in it simultaneously.

In turn, informal relationships in a group include a value-normative system, a status-role structure and a system of interpersonal connections and preferences. Such a group is in a complex system of relationships with other groups. Figuratively speaking, a social group, like a drop of water, reflects the entire diversity of society. Therefore, to one degree or another, a wide variety of conflicts can arise in it.

The most characteristic of them are:

Intrapersonal conflict:

• a) caused by intragroup problems;
• b) coming from outside and causing intra-group tension.

Interpersonal conflict:

• a) value-normative;
• b) status-role;
• c) psychological incompatibility.

Conflict between a group (subgroup) and a group member.

Conflict between subgroups in a particular group.

Conflict between formal and informal systems of relations.

Intergroup conflicts.

The classification of group conflicts can also be considered depending on the types of social motives of intragroup interaction. In Conflictology: textbook. Allahverdova O.V. etc. pp. 29 - 56. Allahverdova O.V., identified six varieties of such motives:

• 1. The motive for maximizing the overall gain (cooperation).
• 2. The motive for maximizing one’s own gain (individualism).
• 3. The motive for maximizing relative gain (competition).
• 4. The motive of maximizing the gain of another (altruism).
• 5. The motive of minimizing the gain of another (aggression).

Minimizing differences between one's own and others' winnings (equality).

Each of the listed motives presupposes its own reasons, its own setting and methods of interaction.

Group conflict is a confrontation in which at least one of the parties is represented by a small social group.

We agree to consider a small group to be a small group (from 3 to 40 people) of people who have a common goal, are connected by joint activities and are in direct personal contact (communication) for a long time.

There are two main types of group conflicts, person-group and group-group.

In accordance with this division, let us consider the classification of group conflicts.

• 1. Classification of conflicts of the “person-group” type:
• 1.1. Conflict between the manager and the team usually arises as a result of the boss’s low competence, unacceptable management style, or the appointment of a new manager who has different requirements.
• 1.2. Conflict between an ordinary employee and the team can develop when someone deviates from established group norms of behavior. Sometimes the cause of such a conflict is the presence in the team of a personality with a pronounced conflict orientation (the so-called conflict personality);
• 1.3. A conflict between an individual and a microgroup can arise as a result of changes in group consciousness, the leader exceeding his authority, or low professional training
• 2. Classification of conflicts of the “group-group” type:
• 2.1. A conflict between the administration and personnel of an organization may arise due to violations of legal norms, low wages, poor communication;
• 2.2. Conflict between departments in an organization usually arises due to the distribution of resources, mutual dependence on tasks performed, and structural restructuring;
• 2.3. The conflict between microgroups in an organization is associated with the opposition of their interests, the ambitions of their leaders, and the presence of mutually exclusive goals and values;
• 2.4. The conflict between organizations has the following reasons: failure to fulfill contractual obligations, struggle for sales markets, access to resources, spheres of influence;
• 2.5. The conflict between informal groups in society is based on group extremism or a discrepancy in spiritual interests and values.

A. The motivational approach to the study of group conflicts proposes consideration of a complex of motivating reasons as a basis for explaining group behavior. For example, within the framework of this approach, group hostility towards “outsiders” is considered as a mechanism for maintaining internal stability and cohesion of the group.

B. The situational approach to the study of group conflicts focuses the attention of researchers on the analysis of the situation as a set of external factors. The situation may be in the nature of cooperation or competition. Grishina V.N. Psychology of conflict. Page 116-118

Thus, conflict can be functional and lead to improved organizational performance. Or it may be dysfunctional and lead to decreased personal satisfaction, group cooperation, and effectiveness in relation to the leader and possibly decreased job performance.

Any social group is a rather complex socio-psychological formation. Formal and informal systems of relations can function in it simultaneously. In turn, informal relationships include the value-normative system of the group, the status-role structure and the system of interpersonal connections and preferences. In addition, the group is in a complex system of relationships with other groups. Figuratively speaking, a social group, like a drop of water, reflects the diversity of society as a whole. Therefore, a wide variety of conflicts can take place in it to one degree or another. The most typical of them are the following:

• 1) intrapersonal conflict: a) caused by intragroup problems;
• b) introduced by a group member from outside and challenging

intragroup tension;

• 2) interpersonal conflict: a) value-normative;
• b) status-role;
• c) psychological incompatibility;

Group conflicts can also be classified depending on the types of social motives of intragroup interaction, such as, for example:

• 1) the motive of maximizing the total gain (cooperation);
• 2) the motive of maximizing one’s own gain (individualism);
• 3) motive for maximizing relative gain (competition);
• 4) the motive of maximizing the gain of another (altruism);
• 5) the motive of minimizing the gain of another (aggression);
• 6) minimizing the differences between one’s own and others’ winnings (equality).

Each of the listed motives presupposes its own reasons for the emergence of contradictions, its own conflict setting and its own methods of conflict interaction[1].

• [1] See: Krichevsky R.L., Dubovskaya E.M.
  Psychology of a small group: theoretical and applied aspects. - M., 1991. - P. 147.

Sources used:

• https://oltest.ru/tests/filosofiya_i_psihologiya/konfliktologiya/voprosy/8/
• https://bstudy.net/762293/psihologiya/gruppovye_konflikty_klassifikatsiya_sposoby_razresheniya
• https://zaochnik.com/spravochnik/psihologija/psihologija-konflikta/gruppovye-konflikty/
• https://studwood.ru/1848195/psihologiya/ponyatie_gruppovyh_konfliktov_vidy_klassifikatsiya
• https://studref.com/315397/psihologiya/vidy_konfliktov_gruppe

Stages of conflict resolution

To successfully resolve a controversial issue, you need to break down the problem and then eliminate it.

• Diagnostics. At this stage, groups develop their demands, choose a strategy that they will follow in order to achieve a win for the opposing side.
• Discussion. Collective bargaining between two opposing groups helps to better understand the views of the opponents. Groups put forward their demands and bring opponents up to date. After all the circumstances have been clarified, a decision can be made.
• Conflict resolution. Who is to blame and what to do is decided in the first two stages of a controversial situation. The third stage is finding a compromise or the complete victory of one of the opposing sides.

Conflict management

The science of conflictology resolves all issues related to controversial situations that arise in various groups. To solve any problem, you need a desire to make contact. For this purpose, each group has its own leader. A responsible person expresses the interests of his fellow humans. If all members of the group participate in resolving the conflict, a bazaar will result. Therefore, the problem will be resolved by two people or a small group of representatives of each team. Adjustment comes through discussion. The opposing sides express their opinions regarding the resolution of the conflict. As a result, the controversial situation is resolved according to one of two scenarios:

• a clear winner emerges;
• there is a compromise.

Negative impacts of conflict

There are not many of them, but they are very significant:

• Destruction of friendships. If the members of two opposing groups were friends, then the further development of such relationships is a big question. Companions will try to break up the connection between their supporters and will do their best to prove that there is no need to maintain old connections.
• Any conflict interferes with the normal course of things. If there is discord between employees in a company, then the normal functioning of the enterprise will be in question. Instead of fulfilling their responsibilities, people will be busy sorting things out.
• Loss of reputation. Few people know how to control their words and take responsibility for every phrase spoken. Often people throw words into the wind without thinking about the consequences. Public statements made with zeal can backfire on any member of the group. People may say something in the heat of the moment, and they will have to spend a lot of time and effort to restore their reputation.

Positive Impact of Conflict

Conflict between people should not be perceived as a tragedy. Human misunderstandings are the norm. It’s not for nothing that our ancestors came up with the expression that truth is born in a dispute. What are the positive aspects of conflict?

• Any controversial situation helps a group of people, as well as each individual, to better understand themselves. A person reconsiders his value system and makes sure that he thinks correctly. Never be ashamed to admit your mistakes. It is a shame to not follow the path that a person considers correct.
• Any problem can unite a team. People have the opportunity to look at their allies and understand what kind of society surrounds them. Often, in the process of controversial situations, friendships are formed, which, after the conflict has been resolved, continue to be maintained for many years.
• Each person begins to correctly set personal priorities. The essence of the issue in any controversial situation is quite clear. The group is fighting to defend its interests. And each individual can understand that the issue being solved is vitally important for him. Setting priorities helps a person grow and not stray from the right course of life.

Topic 10 Group conflicts

Group conflicts are less common in social practice than interpersonal conflicts, but they are always larger in scale and more severe in their consequences. Each of us at work or in any other group interaction can become embroiled in group conflict. The danger of such conflicts is that they often arise due to the ambitions of leaders, “ex-managers”, etc.

There are other causes of intergroup conflicts. Knowledge of the theory of group conflicts, as well as other types of psychological conflicts, is not only the most important component of the professional training of specialists in various fields, but also the most important guideline for each of us in group relationships. This topic examines various aspects of such conflicts.

Self-study material

The concept of group conflicts and their classification

Group conflicts are nothing more than a confrontation in which at least one of the parties is represented by a small social group.

Such confrontation arises on the basis of a clash of opposing group motives. Based on the above, two main types of group conflicts can be distinguished: “person-group” conflict and “group-group” conflict.

Each of the identified types of group conflicts has its own specifics according to its main characteristics.

Conflict "person - group"

Conflicts between an individual and a group arise in the environment of group relationships and have certain features that should be taken into account in managing these conflicts.

The first feature is related to the structure of such a conflict. The subject in it, on the one hand, is the individual, and on the other, the group. Therefore, the conflict interaction here occurs on the basis of a collision of personal and group motives, and the images of the conflict situation are presented by the first subject in individual views and assessments, and by the second - in group ones.

The second feature reflects the specific causes of the conflict in question. And such reasons are directly related to the position of the individual in the group, which is characterized by such concepts as “position”, “status”, “internal attitude”, “role”, “group norms”.

Position is the official position of an individual in a group, determined by position.

Status is the real position of an individual in the system of intra-group relations, the degree of his authority. Status can be high, medium and low.

Internal attitude is a person’s subjective perception of his status in a group.

A role is a normatively defined or collectively approved pattern of individual behavior in a group.

Group norms are general rules of behavior that all members of the group adhere to.

The causes of conflicts that arise between an individual and a group are always associated with: a) violation of role expectations; b) with the inadequacy of the internal attitude to the status of the individual (especially the conflict of the individual with the group is observed when his internal attitude is overestimated); c) in violation of group norms.

The third feature is reflected in the forms of manifestation of this conflict. These forms can be: the use of group sanctions; significant restriction or complete cessation of informal communication between group members and the conflicting party; sharp criticism of the conflicting person; euphoria on the part of the conflicting party, etc.

Classification of conflicts “person - group”

When analyzing conflicts between an individual and a group, it is important to take into account their diversity. In table 10.1 provides a classification of such conflicts.

Table 10.1 Classification of conflicts of the “person - group” type

Managing conflicts between individuals and groups

The specifics of conflict management between an individual and a group are presented in Table. 10.2.

Table 10.2 Managing conflicts of the “person - group” type

Continuation of the table. 10 2

Intergroup conflicts

1 In an intergroup conflict, the opposing parties are groups (small, medium or micro groups). The basis of such confrontation is the clash of oppositely directed group motives (interests, values, goals). This is one of the essential features of such conflicts.

In the process of managing intergroup conflicts, it is important to take into account some of their other features.

Firstly, the specifics of intergroup conflict should be determined by the content of some of its structural elements. In particular, when analyzing such a conflict, it is important to take into account the subjective content of the image of the conflict situation, which is in the nature of group views, opinions, and assessments. The characteristics of the typical subjective content of a conflict situation in an intergroup conflict come down to three phenomena:

1. “Deindividuation” of mutual perception. Members of conflicting groups perceive each other according to the “Us - Them” scheme.

2. Inadequate social, group comparison. In group opinions, the in-group is rated higher, and the merits of the opposing group are underestimated.

3. Group attribution. In this case, the positive behavior of the in-group and the negative behavior of the out-group is explained by internal reasons. And, accordingly, the negative behavior of one’s own group and the positive behavior of an out-group is explained by external circumstances.

Secondly, the specifics of intergroup conflicts are reflected in their classification, which is given in table. 10.3.

Thirdly, intergroup conflicts also differ in the forms in which they manifest themselves and occur. These forms are: (• meetings, meetings, rallies of groups; • strikes; • meetings of leaders; • discussions; • negotiations.

Intergroup Conflict Management

When making management decisions on intergroup conflicts, it is important to take into account not only the features, but also the functions of these conflicts. In this regard, you should keep in mind such functions as:

Table 10.3 Classification of intergroup conflicts

— cohesion of a group defending just interests;

— a split in a group defending illegal interests;

— approval of the individual’s status in the group.

The content of intergroup conflict management is reflected in Table. 10.4.

Table 10.4 Intergroup conflict management

Sources for in-depth study of the topic

1. Antsupov A. Ya., Shipilov A. I. Conflictology. - M.: UNITY, 1999. - Ch. 29; 31-34.

2. Grishina N.V. Psychology of conflict. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2000.

3. Conflictology / Ed. A. S. Carmina. - St. Petersburg: Lan, 1999. - Chapter 5.

4. Kozyrev G.I. Introduction to conflictology. - M.: Vlados, 1999. - P. 144-146.

Control questions

1. Name the two main types of group conflicts.

2. List the features of the “person - group” conflict.

3. List the options for conflicts between the individual and the group.

4. Name the forms of manifestation of conflicts between an individual and a group.

5. Name the main reasons for the conflict between the manager and the team he leads.

6. What is the basis of intergroup conflict?

7. Explain the concept of group attribution.

8. List the options for intergroup conflicts.

9. List the main forms of manifestation of intergroup conflicts.

10. List the features of the subjective content of a conflict situation of intergroup conflict.

Lesson 10.1. Practical lesson on the topic: “Conflict between an individual and a group” (conducted by analyzing and discussing conflict situations)

Purpose of the lesson. Consolidating students' knowledge of the main characteristics of group conflicts, developing their skills in analyzing conflicts of the "person - group" type and developing skills in managing them.

Procedure for conducting the lesson

Preparatory stage. In one or two weeks, students receive instructions for conducting classes in the form of analysis and discussion of specific situations. They are given instructions to independently study the literature and understand the main issues related to the topic: “features of conflicts of the “person - group” type”, “classification of conflicts of the “person - group” type”, “causes of conflicts between an individual and a group”, “management of conflicts between individually and as a group.”

During the lesson. Students are offered specific situations that they must analyze, propose their own options for resolving them, and take part in the discussion.

Situation 1

In the design bureau, the relationship between the head of the department and the team did not work out. The head of the department was appointed two months ago. Before that, he worked in another department and had a good reputation as a specialist. He has a large number of inventions; one of the scientific projects, the leader of which he was a leading engineer in a previous position in another department, received the highest rating at an international exhibition.

Analyze what reasons could form the basis of the conflict between the new boss and the team?

Situation 2

At a meeting of the creative team, the issue of nominating employee A for the honorary title “Honored Scientist” was discussed. The issue of nominating employee A for such a title, according to the relevant Regulations, could be decided either by open or secret voting. After a short discussion of the candidacy, employee B. made a proposal: the nomination procedure should be carried out by secret ballot. It is clear that as a result, the voting results were not in favor of A. Additional information:

1) the initiator of A.’s nomination for the honorary title was the team leader;

2) the manager was aware of negative statements addressed to A. by some employees of the team regarding allegedly undeserved promotions at work (A. before the change of the team leader, which occurred two years before he was nominated for an honorary title, despite successes in research activity, did not find proper assessment from the former manager M. With the arrival of the new manager S.A. was appointed to a higher position);

3) the number of the team in which the applicant for the honorary title worked was small (10 people); among them were four employees who had an honorary title and three who applied for it.

Analyze this situation for its potential conflict.

Situation 3*

The team of fitters-patterners (six people) always stayed very united. The team members, despite the significant difference in age, often spent their free time together. The elders treated the younger ones with patronage, the younger ones treated the elders with respect. When one of the members of the brigade retired, a young mechanic, Akimov, who had graduated from vocational school two or three years ago, was accepted into it. At first they were wary of him. But after a month or two, quite friendly relations developed between him and the brigade, he was accepted into the team, and became “one of our own.”

After another two months, the situation changed. Akimov, as a young and not very experienced worker, was entrusted with the production of a large series of standard patterns. Using traditional technology, he would have earned an average salary for a brigade. However, Akimov quickly figured out how to rationalize the work. He took a dozen blanks and welded them to each other. The result was a package. Then he cut out the desired shape on the entire package at once, sanded the ends, separated the package and treated the surface of each pattern. Soon Akimov exceeded production standards by three to five times, his earnings began to grow rapidly and exceeded the foreman’s earnings by one and a half times. People in the brigade began to look askance at Akimov and notice many flaws in his behavior: either he went away to an unknown location, or he imposed himself with unsolicited advice, or, on the contrary, he remained silent when everyone was trying to give useful advice to a comrade. Finally, there was a complete break in relations. Akimov asked the shop manager to transfer him to another brigade. But it turned out that other teams of mechanics did not want to accept him. A month later, Akimov quit the plant.

Analyze this situation for conflict.

Situation 4**

The translation group of the scientific and technical information department of the experimental design bureau consisted of five women and the head of the group, Mironov. He tried not to interfere in the relationships of the translators, who usually independently distributed the work among themselves. There was no reason for concern: the group not only coped with the work, but also significantly exceeded the production quota.

* See Borodkin F. M., Koryak N. M. Attention, conflict1 - Novosibirsk Science,

1989 - From 87

•* Ibid. - From 89-90

Relations in the group were good. The translators - young women of about the same age - helped each other. There were no frictions, much less conflicts, between them. At the end of each week there was a traditional group meeting, at which Mironov usually noted the good work of all translators and reported on upcoming translations. The translators themselves offered additional material for translation that was interesting from their point of view.

In the group, the object of everyone's care was Zebrova, who did not have sufficient experience and qualifications. This tutelage annoyed her a little, but she gratefully accepted the help. One day, at a traditional meeting, Zebrova proposed for translation a large series of articles containing material on a device, the development of which at the moment in the design bureau had clearly reached a dead end. Mironov, convinced of the value of the material, ordered Zebrava to put aside the remaining translations and immediately begin this series. Zebrova took up her work seriously, sparing neither time nor effort, working on Saturdays, Sundays and evenings. The very first translations helped the designers make significant progress in the development of the device. Zebrava’s activities were noticed by the management of the design bureau. At meetings, Mironov several times noted Zebrava’s useful initiative, pointing out the high quality of her translations. The amount of work completed by Zebrava turned out to be significantly greater than that of any other translator.

After about two months, the situation in the group changed dramatically. Mironov, entering the translators’ room, often saw Zebrova sitting with tear-stained eyes, and there was a painful silence in the room. Sometimes his arrival interrupted loud disputes. It became clear from everything that the translators changed their attitude towards Zebrava. At first they silently disapproved of her eagerness. Then they began to exchange caustic remarks about her appearance in her presence. Then they openly accused Zebrova of wanting to stand out from the team and make a career. The situation was getting worse. The total volume of transfers in the group has clearly decreased. If earlier some of the translators worked late in the evenings, now everyone, except Zebrava, was at work for a strictly prescribed time and did not take translations home. The initiative at the traditional weekly meetings also dried up - everyone sat silently and waited for Mironov’s instructions. He tried to shame the translators, to show that they were treating Zebrava unfairly, to express dissatisfaction with the decreased output, but was met with deaf disapproving silence.

Relations in the group began to improve when, having agreed with the leadership of the technical information group, Mironov moved Zebrava to another room. Now translators began to meet quite often outside of working hours. However, the volume of transfers continued to decline and then stabilized, although at a good level, but incomparably lower than before. This was noticed by the head of the department. At a group meeting, Mironov raised the issue of decreased output and used Zebrova as an example. The translators appealed to existing translation norms. Indeed, the norm was strictly followed by everyone. Then Mironov achieved the introduction of a bonus system, making the bonus dependent on exceeding the translation standard and its quality. Salaries were changed in such a way that the variable part of wages could amount to up to 30% of monthly earnings. The result was unexpected - all four translators placed their resignation letters on Mironov’s desk. Persuasion did not help: after two weeks, only Zebrova remained in the translation group.

Analyze the motives and causes of the conflict.

Lesson 10.2. Business game “Conflict situation in a complex construction team”*

Purpose of the game. To familiarize students with socio-psychological studies of conflicts that arise in work collectives and small formal and informal groups, to identify the causes of conflicts, to determine their types and to try to find ways to constructively resolve conflict situations.

Game participants:

1. Foreman of the complex construction team Butov.

2. Informal leader of the Lomov brigade.

3. “New” proactive worker of the Novikov brigade.

4. Team members: worker 1, worker 2, etc. (you can give each one a first and last name).

5. Group of experts.

Game situation

The following negative traditions have developed in the complex construction team:

“See: Kozyrev G.I. Introduction to conflict management. - M.: Vlados, 1989. - P. 149-150.

1. Part of the working time, individual members of the team performed “left-handed” work, often using materials from the construction site.

2. The “left” money earned (part of the money), as a rule, was used to organize a joint feast.

3. The initiator and leader of the “leftist” earnings and feasts was the informal leader Lomov. He also selected the most loyal members of the brigade for the “left” work.

4. There were frequent delays and absenteeism without a good reason in the brigade; the remaining members of the brigade were forced to work for the entire brigade both during absenteeism and while part of the brigade was performing “left-handed work”.

5. The foreman, an elderly man working towards retirement, did not actually interfere with the traditions that had developed in the brigade.

6. An enterprising, young, but already experienced worker, Novikov, comes to the brigade for permanent work. He sees that part of the brigade, led by the informal leader Lomov, is parasitizing at the expense of the rest of its members. Novikov does not want his work to be appropriated by “parasites”, and begins to act.

Game procedure

1. Appoint (elect) a foreman, informal leader, “new guy” and experts.

2. Divide the remaining students into approximately two equal parts, one of which will represent “active” supporters of the informal leader Lomov, the other will represent “passive” workers forced to endure the traditions existing in the brigade.

3. During the game, the role players change places several times.

4. Statements by experts and summing up. Possible options for the “new guy” to act (for game leaders):

1) contact the foreman;

2) talk to the informal leader;

3) at a team meeting, try to win over the “passive” members of the team and jointly put “pressure” on: a) the foreman; b) informal leader; c) supporters of negative traditions; d) for everyone; e) draw up a collective appeal to senior management.

Other options are possible.

Control test

Choose the correct answer for each of the 10 questions.

1. Group conflicts include conflicts:

a) individual - group;

b) group - group;

c) individual - group and group - group; d) leader - team;

e) microgroup - a microgroup within a team.

2. Group attribution is:

a) overestimation in group opinions of one’s own group and underestimation of the merits of the opposing group;

b) explaining the positive behavior of the in-group and the negative behavior of the out-group by internal reasons, and, accordingly, the negative behavior of the in-group and the positive behavior of the out-group by external circumstances;

c) inadequate social comparison of in-group and out-group;

d) “deindividuation” of mutual perception;

e) contrasting one's own and another group according to the moral characteristics of their social interaction.

3. What conflicts are characterized by the following reasons: unsatisfactory communications; violation of legal norms; unbearable working conditions; low salary:

a) conflict between microgroups in a team;

b) conflict between the leader and the microgroup;

c) conflict between the organization’s management and staff;

d) conflict between divisions within the organization;

e) conflict between the informal leader and the team?

4. What conflicts are characterized by the following reasons: mutual dependence on completed tasks; resource allocation; poor communications; structural restructuring:

a) conflict between microgroups in a team;

b) conflict between the leader and the microgroup;

c) conflict between the organization’s management and staff;

d) conflict between divisions within the organization;

e) conflict between management and the team?

5. What conflicts are characterized by the following reasons: opposition of interests; goals; leaders' ambitions; poor communications:

a) conflict between microgroups in a team;

b) conflict between the leader and the microgroup;

c) conflict between the organization’s management and staff;

d) conflict between divisions within the organization;

e) conflict between management and the team?

6. What conflicts are characterized by the following reasons: a new leader appointed from outside (the team had its own worthy candidate for this position); management style; low managerial competence; strong influence of negatively oriented microgroups and their leaders:

a) conflict between management and the team;

b) conflict between the leader and the microgroup;

c) conflict between administration and staff;

d) conflict between an ordinary employee and the team;

d) conflict between departments within the organization?

7. What conflicts are characterized by the following reasons: manifestation of compromising evidence against the leader; abuse of leadership authority; change in group consciousness:

a) conflict between management and the team;

b) conflict between the leader and the microgroup;

c) conflict between administration and staff;

d) conflict between an ordinary employee and the team; d) conflict between departments within the organization?

8. What conflicts are characterized by causes: conflict personality; violation of group norms; low professional training; inadequacy of the internal attitude to the status:

a) conflict between management and the team;

b) conflict between the leader and the microgroup;

c) conflict between administration and staff;

d) conflict between an ordinary employee and the team;

d) conflict between departments within the organization?

9. The main phenomena characterizing the typical subjective content of a conflict situation of intergroup conflict are:

a) “Deindividuation” of mutual perception, inadequate group comparison, group solidarity;

b) “Deindividuation” of mutual perception, perceptual deformation, group attribution;

c) “Deindividuation” of mutual perception, perceptual deformation, group solidarity;

d) inadequate group comparison, group attribution, perceptual deformation;

e) inadequate group comparison, group attribution, “de-individuation” of mutual perception.

10. The main causes of conflict between the manager and the team he leads are:

a) management style, low competence of the manager;

b) the influence of negatively oriented microgroups and their leaders;

c) negative assessment of the manager by senior management;

d) poor communications;

e) distribution of resources.

Adviсe

Do you want to quickly resolve a conflict? Then follow these tips:

• Groups that are in conflict should be forced to jointly engage in socially beneficial activities. Work brings people together. Engaging in useful activities together forces members of warring groups to look at their opponents from a different perspective. The emerging sympathy will help relieve tension and reduce it to nothing.
• If you cannot quickly resolve a controversial issue, you should replace the value system. Let what seemed like a priority fade into the background. The main thing is to make people believe that the essence of the conflict is unimportant, and it is not at all necessary to find a winner and a loser now.
• Group members must interact not only with each other, but also with other people. A person who communicates with independent people who do not take part in resolving a difficult situation can receive good advice or reconsider their views on certain things.

Intergroup conflict[edit]

Sources [edit]

Social psychology, particularly the discontinuity effect of intergroup conflict, suggests that "groups tend to be even more competitive and aggressive than individuals." [7] Two main sources of intergroup conflict have been identified: "competition for valuable material resources, according to realist conflict theory, or for social rewards such as esteem and deference... as described in relative deprivation theory" [8]

Group conflict can easily enter into an escalating spiral of hostility, marked by polarized views of black and white, with comparable actions viewed in diametrically opposed ways: “we make concessions, but they try to lure us in with tricks. We are persistent and brave, but they are inflexible, irrational, stubborn and blinded by ideology." [9]

It is widely believed that intergroup and intragroup hostility are (at least to some extent) inversely related: that "unfortunately, there is an inverse relationship between external wars and internal strife." [10] Thus, "in politics, for example, one can gain the extremely comforting feeling of mutual support from one's group by focusing one's attention on the enemy." [11] Freud wrote a similar, almost harmless version, according to which “it is communities with adjacent territories, as well as connected with each other in other ways, that are constantly at odds with and ridicule each other - as, for example, the Spaniards and the Portuguese ... . [as] a convenient and relatively harmless satisfaction of the tendency towards aggression, by which cohesion between members of the community becomes easier." [12] A more extreme version of the theory suggests that "the pent-up aggression of a subgroup, unless it can combine with the pent-up aggression of other subgroups to attack a common external enemy, will manifest itself in the form of riots, persecutions, and insurrections." [13]

Domains of beliefs that contribute to[edit]

Through an extensive review of the literature, Roy J. Eidelson and Judy I. Eidelson identified parallels between individuals and the collective worldview of groups based on five key belief areas. [14]

• Superiority
  : At the individual level, this belief revolves around a person's strong belief that he or she is better than other people in important ways. At the group level, superiority involves shared beliefs in moral superiority, entitlement, chosenness, and special destiny. [14] The belief that one's group has a superior cultural heritage (eg, history, values, language, traditions) is common among groups that base their identity on their ethnicity. The development of Hitler's ideology of the Aryans as the "master race" is one example of this belief. [15] This belief may be unconscious when group members do not realize: “The power and influence of such a worldview is directly related to its operation as an invisible curtain that prevents individuals, groups and organizations from seeing their harmful consequences.” [16] These authors noted that several committees studying racism have used the term ethnocentric monoculturalism to describe this belief in the superiority of one's own group's cultural heritage (including history, values, language, traditions, arts and crafts, etc.) over cultural legacy of other groups. Within this belief system, they also noted a corresponding belief in the inferiority of the heritage of all other groups, the ability to impose their standards and beliefs on less powerful groups, evidence of the group's core beliefs and values ​​in their practices, programs and policies as well as in the institutions and structures of the group society, and that they were capable of operating beyond the level of conscious awareness. [17]
• Injustice
  : At the individual level, this belief revolves around perceived mistreatment by others and/or the world at large.
  At the group level, this means a worldview in which the ingroup has serious and legitimate claims against the outgroup. [14] This belief is believed to have contributed significantly to the motivation for war over the last two centuries, as most wars of the time focused on issues of justice
  rather than security or power (Welch, 1993). Injustice in a group environment may be based on a shared belief that their group has not achieved desired results because of the actions or inactions of a more powerful group that led to a biased or undesirable outcome, rather than because of inconsistencies or actions. the group itself.[18] Volkan coined the phrase “Selective Traumas” to refer to “a mental representation of an event that caused a large group of people to experience severe loss, feel helpless, and be victimized by another group” [19] that are distorted to perpetuate a belief of injustice.
• Vulnerability
  : At the individual level, vulnerability refers to a person's belief that he or she is constantly in danger. At the group level, this belief manifests itself as fears for the future. This vulnerability can manifest itself in a group as catastrophic thinking—where the perceived worst-case scenario is seen as inevitable. [14] Chirot (2001) notes that the genocides of Armenia, Germany, Cambodia, and Rwanda shared the common belief that “if they had not first destroyed their real or imagined enemies, they themselves would have been destroyed” (p. 10).
• Mistrust
  : At the individual level, this belief focuses on the perceived intention of others to cause harm and/or be hostile.
  The concept of trust is often considered by psychologists as the first problem of psychosocial development. [20] At the group level, this worldview focuses in particular on the idea that out-groups are dishonest, untrustworthy, and have negative intentions towards in-groups. In its more extreme manifestations, this belief is similar to collective paranoia
  , which is defined as collective beliefs, false or exaggerated, that cluster around ideas of harm, persecution, threats, or other neglect by malicious outgroups [21]. Even when such hostility does not exist, this mistrust can cause group members to view each other's behavior as hostile and unkind. [14]
• Helplessness
  : At the individual level, helplessness is based on the belief that even carefully planned and executed actions will not lead to the desired outcome. When viewed at a group level, it represents a collective mindset of powerlessness and dependency. The group shares a pessimistic approach that focuses on their own weaknesses and attributes failures to their own limitations. [14] Helplessness, when it exists as a shared belief in a group, serves as a limitation to organized political movement, since those who participate in a social movement must see themselves as capable of correcting the wrongs they perceive. [22]

Donald Horowitz also argues that the belief, no matter how accurate, that one group is behind another group can also contribute to conflict and that such groups often face significant anxiety about threats posed by other groups. The backward group fears that it will eventually be dominated by more advanced groups. Backward groups tend to view their individual members as having negative qualities such as laziness and lack of intelligence, while collectively they view themselves as disorganized and lacking unity, with members only caring about themselves and not their group. In contrast, members of advanced groups are perceived as having positive qualities such as integrity, intelligence, and hard work, while collectively they are perceived as well organized, cohesive, and committed to promoting their group interests. Thus, advanced groups are perceived as having superior qualities as at the individual and collective level. The resulting anxiety experienced by backward groups can lead them to believe that their very survival as a group is at stake, and that they risk extinction, being replaced by more advanced groups. Horowitz argues that this means that backward groups are more likely to initiate violence.[23]