Focus on Microlevel Practices
The final limitation described here relates to the focus on microlevel practices, namely, how existing research has concentrated primarily on two areas: (1) the sources of interracial/ interethnic conflict and (2) conflict style differences.
While these lines of research have produced multiple studies providing significant insight, they have been criticized as doing so through an “evaded analysis of how interpersonal practices connect to larger cultural, historical, and political systems” (Houston, 2002, p. 31). Communication generally, and the ways in which individuals engage in conflict specifically, is an essential aspect of one’s culture. Yet simply focusing on communication micropractices without recognizing how they are shaped by larger macrolevel frameworks does little to advance understanding of these particular forms of communication (Ribeau, 1995). Contemporary scholars, in fact, have called for research that attends to historical power structures within society (Stephan & Stephan, 2001) that inform present-day hostile cultural distances between different racial and ethnic groups (Gallois, 2003).Recent research that addresses issues such as interracial conflict, prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination also calls for a more progressive approach to social change than increasing the amount of liking between parties in intergroup conflict. Within a collective action perspective, the focus is on mobilization of members of disadvantaged groups, a challenge of the status quo, and destabilization of unjust institutions (Dixon et al., 2010; Klandermans, 1997). Recognizing that the practice is situated within the larger political, economic, and social systems of oppression enhances our understanding considerably (Stephan & Stephan, 2001). In short, existing research has failed to adequately address issues of power in interracial and interethnic conflict.
A number of different communication theories exist that provide useful frameworks for understanding interracial and interethnic communication. These include, but are not limited to, face negotiation theory, communication accommodation theory, anxiety/ uncertainty management theory, expectancy violations theory, cultural types theories, integrated threat theory, and the cultural values dimensional grid (for a brief summary, see Nicotera, 2009). Our final section of this chapter turns to another emerging theoretical framework, co-cultural theory, to help frame a discussion of future research and practical applications in the area of interracial and interethnic conflict.