Intergroup Communication Theories and Strategies
SIT and CAT are two prominent intergroup theories. According to SIT (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), humans categorize the social world into us versus them or in-group versus outgroup.
Individual’s social identity is defined by his or her group membership. In-group refers to the group(s) that individuals belong to, and out-group refers to the group(s) that they do not belong to. While individuals feel close to in-group members emotionally, they feel distant from out-group members. From motivational point of view, individuals desire to maintain a positive social identity, and it shapes how they perceive and relate to in-group and out-group members. “A Class Divided or the Blue Eyes and Brown Eyes” documentary on Frontline PBS (www.pbs.org/ wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/divided/) most excellently illustrates the influence of social identity on children’s perceptions and treatment of each other. In a matter of minutes, the third graders perceived each other in terms of their group memberships based on just superficial eye color and treated in-group and out-group members very differently. They favored their in-group members (e.g., playing with each other) and discriminated against the out-group members (e.g., tease and bully) that included good friends prior to social categorization. These favorable and unfavorable intergroup interactions between the third graders were replicated by the adults at certain correctional facility. The follow-up open discussions in both situations revealed deeper insights into the processes of intergroup interaction.Social identity is intimately related to group’s social status. According to Ethnolinguistic Vitality Theory (Giles, Bourhis, & Taylor, 1977; Giles & Johnson, 1987), groups may differ in terms of “group vitality.” This vitality indicates the strength of a group, and it can be measured on three dimensions: demography, institutional support, and status (e.g., social and economic status).
Clement, Baker, and MacIntyre (2003) summarize the body of literature on ethnolinguistic vitality and willingness to communicate, which indicates the language of highest group vitality influenced interpersonal and intergroup interactions. Social identity is partly derived from the status of in-group membership (Giles et al., 2010). In intergroup context, groups with high vitality, especially social and economic status, are likely to have distinctive positive status (e.g., China as a rising economic giant) and wield power over groups with low vitality (e.g., Nepal, Pakistan, and South Africa). SIT advances three strategies that individuals can use to gain or maintain positive social identity in intergroup context. These are social mobility, social creativity, and social competition (see Giles et al., 2010). Social mobility refers to how individuals can move from one group to another given the permeability of intergroup boundary. For example, in the 1950s, African Americans with light skin color were able to pass as White, and this new group membership afforded them acceptance, respect, and favorable treatment from the Whites unlike fellow African Americans who suffered racial prejudice and discrimination. Notably, social mobility, in this case, has resulted in positive social identities for the concerned individuals but not for the African Americans as a group.Alternatively, groups with low vitality can use social creativity to upgrade their social identity. Social creativity can take many forms. One way can be through redefinition. For example, African Americans have claimed positive social identity by redefining beauty as in “Black is Beautiful.” Another way can be choosing a different referent for social comparison. In intergroup context, ethnic minorities can upgrade their social identity by comparing themselves to each other rather than to the ethnic majority. For example, Hispanic Americans may find it counterproductive to compare themselves with the status of Euro-Americans, but a comparison with Native Americans can result in more positive distinctiveness and high vitality.
To use another example, Bhutan—a small Himalayan Kingdom—can claim more positive social identity based on their membership in the United Nations as compared with Taiwan, but the latter can claim more positive social identity based on their economic status compared with Bhutan. Social creativity strategy could also include creating superordinate goal(s) and recategorization. For example, European Union and G-8 Nations have been formed with superordinate goals that member nations consent to, and memberships in these organizations represent recategorization that de-emphasize the social identity of each member nation. They are able to put together united efforts to address common issues such as European economic crisis.Last, groups may be able to maintain and upgrade positive social identity through social competition. Social competition involves “advocating, protesting, and fighting for more positive ingroup conditions” (Giles et al., 2010, p. 6). Social change movements of civil rights, feminist rights, gay and lesbian rights, and indigenous rights are excellent examples of social competition for claiming positive social identity. Recent Occupy movements around the United States and the world calling to end corporate corruption also illustrate social competition (99% poor vs. 1% super rich) strategy to upgrade conditions of commoners and gain positive social identity. A couple of more examples of intergroup social competition strategy are India’s effort to secure a permanent seat in the Security Council of the United Nations and Iran’s recent application for membership in the United Nations. Most recently, the Arab Spring (en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Arab Spring) and Jasmine Revolution (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasmine Revolution) brought about unimaginable social changes in different regions of the world, and these are excellent examples of social competition strategy employed by people to upgrade their socioeconomic-political conditions and gain positive social identities.
In intergroup relations, especially intergroup conflicts, group vitality and social identification greatly affect what intergroup strategies’ group members use to manage and resolve issues. Not surprisingly, dominant groups across the conflict situations tend to use their power (sociopolitical-economic and military power) and one-up social competition strategies and all available means such as assimilation policy and discriminatory and repressive policy to maintain their positive conditions and distinctive social identity from the subordinate groups (e.g., Sino-Tibetan conflict, Sino-Uighur conflict, and Sino- Mongolian conflict). In China, any form of protest (e.g., hunger strike, picketing, peaceful demonstration and even petition, Tibetan incense offering and prayer flag ceremony, and Falun Gong meditation) is crammed down hard, and protestors are put behind bars with no legal course.
In addition to the above examples of social competition strategy, the PRC also manipulates social creative strategy to maintain their power and image over the so-called national minorities. They have very carefully selected certain Mongolian, Tibetan, and Uighur nationalities and brainwashed them to the extent that they become trusted members of the Communist Political Party. These party comrades (in-group membership) are promoted to nominal high positions such as the former governor of Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR), Jampa Phuntsok, and current governor of TAR, Pema Thinley, to maintain PRC’s positive identity (image) of being nonprejudicial and discriminatory. Interestingly, even their names are Sinicized as in Qiangpa Puncog and Baima Chilin.
From an intergroup communication perspective, group members can use three kinds of strategy: convergence, divergence, and maintenance (Gallois, Ogay, & Giles, 2005; Giles, Coupland, & Coupland, 1991). Convergence strategy involves accommodating verbal and nonverbal behaviors in communicative interaction such as code-switching between bilingual and multilingual individuals.
In contrast, divergence strategy involves nonaccommodating verbal and nonverbal behaviors in interpersonal and intergroup interactions, such as insisting on speaking native language(s) and behaving distinctive nonverbally. Maintenance strategy is simply communicating verbally and nonverbally in one’s usual style, and it is perceived as similar to divergence from the perspective of communication recipient. Studies have evidenced that social identity or group membership(s) influences the use of these communication strategies (Giles et al., 1977; Giles & Gasiorek, 2011; Giles, Willemyns, Gallois, & Anderson, 2007; Harwood & Giles, 2005).MWA-based Memorandum (MWA-M) indicates that Tibetans have used convergence and maintenance strategies to resolve Sino-Tibetan conflict. While seeking Tibetan independence would be a divergence strategy, asking for genuine autonomy for Tibet within the federation of the PRC is a convergence strategy. Using this strategy, Tibetans are accommodating to the territorial and security needs of the PRC. Along with it, Tibetans are using maintenance strategy stating clearly their aspirations to preserve and practice their unique Tibetan culture and civilization. Basically, this means that Tibetans attach much importance to maintaining their belief system, writing and speaking their language, and managing their own affairs of life and national minority status within the PRC. In sharp contrast, the PRC has adamantly used a divergence strategy to maintain their power as evidenced by rejecting memorandum, demanding that no country allows the Dalai Lama to visit and meet with their leaders, denouncing the Dalai Lama, blaming any Tibet crisis on him and “the Dalai Clique” and continued repressive policy and measures, such as selecting reincarnations of the high Tibetan lamas including Panchen Lama and the future Dalai Lama and linking the self-immolators to terrorism (usa.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2012- 03/24/content_14905553.htm).