In what way is scapegoating different from realistic conflict as ...

[ghost!]

In what way is scapegoating different from realistic conflict as a source of prejudice, discrimination, and inter-group conflict?
 
  What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

List the six requirements of the Contact Hypothesis that must be met for contact to reduce prejudice between two formerly hostile groups.
 
  What will be an ideal response?

[stanleka1]

Answer to Question 1

Answer: Realistic conflict theory posits that prejudice, discrimination, and intergroup conflict arise when there is political or economic competition for scarce resources. In some cases there really is a group with which our group is in competition (e.g., newly arrived immigrants competing with native citizens for scarce jobs). In other cases, there really is no other group. When it is difficult to identify the real source of our frustration, or when it is difficult to confront economic forces or government policy, in-groups often invent out-groups to blame for their situation. This is known as scapegoating.

Answer to Question 2

Answer: 1. Both sides must be interdependent. 2. Both sides must pursue a common goal. 3. Both sides must have equal status. 4. Both sides must get to know one another in an informal, friendly setting. 5. Both sides must be exposed to multiple members of the other group. 6. Both sides must know that the social norms of their group, the institution, and the community promote and support equality.