Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Minimal group situations and intergroup discrimination: Comments on the paper by Aschenbrenner and schaefer

Minimal group situations and intergroup discrimination: Comments on the paper by Aschenbrenner... University of Kent, Canterbury HENRl TAJFEL University of Bristol JOHN TURNER University of Bristol INTRODUCTION Aschenbrenner and Schaefer (1980) (A and S) have recently added their comments to the controversy in this Journal (Branthwaite, 1980; Branthwaite et al., 1979; Hyland, 1979; Turner, 1980) about the relative importance of fairness and intergroup discrimination in subjects’ responses in experiments using the minimal group situation. But they have done more in their paper. In its final section (‘Comments on the paradigm’) they make a number of general methodological and statistical criticisms of the Minimal Categorization Paradigm and conclude not only that certain generalizations (e.g. ‘minimal groups are discriminatory’) are unfounded and invalid, but also that results obtained from the paradigm may have little or no relevance to the study of intergroup behaviour. In commenting on the A and S paper, we will take issue with them on three counts: (1) factual; (2) statistical and methodological; and (3) theoretical. In raising factual issues we shall show that, independently of their statistical argument, A and S have omitted, distorted or ignored much of the work on minimal group situations; in the statistical section of the paper we shall dispute their interpretation of the http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png European Journal of Social Psychology Wiley

Minimal group situations and intergroup discrimination: Comments on the paper by Aschenbrenner and schaefer

Download PDF
16 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/minimal-group-situations-and-intergroup-discrimination-comments-on-the-lA0tO35NDM

References (23)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 1980 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
ISSN
0046-2772
eISSN
1099-0992
DOI
10.1002/ejsp.2420100407
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

University of Kent, Canterbury HENRl TAJFEL University of Bristol JOHN TURNER University of Bristol INTRODUCTION Aschenbrenner and Schaefer (1980) (A and S) have recently added their comments to the controversy in this Journal (Branthwaite, 1980; Branthwaite et al., 1979; Hyland, 1979; Turner, 1980) about the relative importance of fairness and intergroup discrimination in subjects’ responses in experiments using the minimal group situation. But they have done more in their paper. In its final section (‘Comments on the paradigm’) they make a number of general methodological and statistical criticisms of the Minimal Categorization Paradigm and conclude not only that certain generalizations (e.g. ‘minimal groups are discriminatory’) are unfounded and invalid, but also that results obtained from the paradigm may have little or no relevance to the study of intergroup behaviour. In commenting on the A and S paper, we will take issue with them on three counts: (1) factual; (2) statistical and methodological; and (3) theoretical. In raising factual issues we shall show that, independently of their statistical argument, A and S have omitted, distorted or ignored much of the work on minimal group situations; in the statistical section of the paper we shall dispute their interpretation of the

Journal

European Journal of Social Psychology – Wiley

Published: Oct 1, 1980

There are no references for this article.