Religious conflict and Intergroup Theory

Abstract

This paper examines various causes of religious conflict such as resources, the minimal group paradigm, and misinformation. Research has shown that the media plays an important role in the creation and development of attitudes and beliefs, especially in intergroup conflict (Paluck, 2009). Thus, it is important to alter the media rhetoric to help improve relations. Several resolutions to religious intergroup conflict are described. These resolutions are alteration of media rhetoric, promotion of interaction between groups, and a bottom-up targeted intervention related to altering the attitudes and behaviors of the individual. The interventions listed are applied to describe their potential at promoting positive social change.

Keywords: Intergroup conflict, religious conflict, intergroup contact theory, social change 

Religious conflict and Intergroup Theory

Intergroup theory is the approach of social psychology to various process and behaviors centered around contact between groups (Fiske, Gilbert, & Lindzey, 2010). Intergroup theory covers processes such as stereotypes, biases, attitudes, perceptions, and so much more, and how they function within the confines of intergroup contact (Fiske, Gilbert, & Lindzey, 2010). One such process that intergroup theory includes is intergroup conflict, which is the study of conflict between groups (Fiske, Gilbert, & Lindzey, 2010). This approach studies the causes, effects, contributing factors, etc. of why groups engage in conflict, and what kind of solutions may exist to remedy or prevent future conflict (Fiske, Gilbert, & Lindzey, 2010).

One of the major issues within modern intergroup conflict is religious conflict, or conflict between religious groups. Conflict of this nature can be open physical violence, philosophical conflict, or simply covert aggression between groups. According to Neuberg et al. (2014), religion and differences in religious beliefs contributes greatly to intergroup conflict around the world such as between Muslims and Jew in the Middle East, or between the religious and secularists in the United States. While much research has been done on this issue, existing scholarship on the issue of religions and conflict fails to pinpoint whether religion is a cause of conflict or just a post hoc justification (Neuberg et al, 2014). Neuberg et al. (2014) notes that no matter which side of the scholarly aisle you fall on, there are many factors that contribute to intergroup conflict amongst various religious populations such as competition for resources or difference in community values. Furthermore Neuberg et al. (2014) states that both resource competition and incompatibility of values are not just contributing factors but leading factors in intergroup religious conflict.

So why is religious conflict a problem? Anyone who has taken basic history knows that there has always been competing religions or faith systems throughout time. However, accompanying this competition was war, famine, and philosophical war to prove that your religion is the best. According to Chua (2013), intergroup conflict of any kind can stifle creativity, especially in tasks that require a multicultural knowledge base. Effects such as this can be seen throughout history such as during the dark ages in which invention and human progress slowed almost to a halt. However, even now this type of conflict has dire consequences. The world is very much multicultural, and multinational from economics to academic scholarship. Countries rely upon one another to provide necessities and aid that without would spell disaster such as the aid provided to Australia during its most recent rash of fires by the United States, U.K., and others. Without international cooperation, which often means inter-religious cooperation, international communities cannot function appropriately (Neuberg et al., 2014).

More than just functioning appropriately, however, violence between religious groups is on the rise (Muggah & Velshi, 2019). According to an article from the World Economic Forum, religious violence has seen a sharp spike over the past decade and affects almost every religious group across a global scale (Muggah & Velshi, 2019). Furthermore, a contributing factor of the problem of religious conflict is the perversion of religious texts by both religious and non-religious entities, as well as the underrepresentation of positive faith-based initiative to curb violence. According to Muggah and Velshi (2019), many initiatives to curb religious conflict go unrepresented and thus other groups take credit for the positive results (such as corporations and governments).

Causes of Religious Conflict

As mentioned before, there are many different potential causes of religious conflict from differing ideologies to competition of resources. First, identity theory is important in understanding intergroup conflict. To be specific, the competition among individual and group identities plays a major role the creation and growth of intergroup conflict (Seul, 1999). According to Seul (1999), individuals constantly engage in efforts to satisfy basic physical and psychological needs, and competition among various identities is a side effect of these attempts. Due to the ability of religion to satisfy so many of these physical and psychological needs and the human impulse of creating a social identity, this may explain why intergroup conflict often occurs along religious lines such as with Muslim/Christian/Judaism followers (Seul, 1999). Thus, identifying with a specific ingroup (such as Christian) may create reason for conflict in that the outgroup is a different identity altogether (such as Muslim), not just not being a part of your ingroup.

Another potential theory for understanding religious conflict is the minimal group paradigm. The minimal group paradigm is related to identity theory and social categorization, which is the process of categorizing things or individuals into groups based on social criteria (Hogg & Cooper, 2007). Tajfel and Turner (1986) developed the term minimal group paradigm to describe the results of their investigation into the minimal conditions necessary for favoritism for the ingroup to occur. What was discovered was that, for two groups that had no previous direct interaction with one another, the simple categorization of members into these groups was enough to create ingroup favoritism, and outgroup discrimination (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). This theory has the potential to explain why religious groups begin conflicting, even when there is no direct interaction with each other. For example, in the United States there is a large anti-Muslim rhetoric. While there are many individuals who don’t care one way or the other, the simple description of someone as Muslim causes a major social shift in the way that person (and others in the group) are treated.

A third consideration about potential causes of religious conflict is stereotype threat. According to Fiske (2014), stereotypes can alter behaviors, success/failure, and simple social definitions through its effect on the way we see ourselves and others. For instance, research shows that members of stereotyped groups underperform on tasks they may be good at for fear of confirming a negative stereotype when their membership with a specific group is made salient (Fiske, 2014). The anxiety, fear, and threat that members of stereotyped groups feel contribute to the confirmation of a stereotype (such as women doing poorly in math). So, what does this mean for religious conflict? If a specific religion is stereotypes a certain way (such as oppressive Christianity, extremist Islam, etc.) then members of that faith, when their religious identity is salient, will unintentionally act in a way that may confirm the stereotype despite their efforts to disconfirm the stereotype, such as attempting to educate someone on their true beliefs versus what the popular opinion happens to be.

Finally, another potential cause of intergroup conflict can be found in the process of acculturation. According to Henriques, Simon, Ispolatov, and Doebeli (2019), intergroup conflict such as that between cultures or religions, can begin and grow under the goal of acculturation, that is the loser adopting the culture of the victor, labeled acculturation drive. Under this cause of intergroup conflict, whether conscious or unconscious, the goal of much intergroup conflict between religions is for the winner of the conflict to spread their ideals, moralities, beliefs, etc. to the losing group, thereby increasing its total perceived power (Henriques, Simon, Ispolatov, and Doebeli, 2019). Relating this to religious conflict can be seen in history and modern faith systems. For example, the gods of the ancient Greek pantheon have direct correlates with the ancient Roman pantheon. Following history, the Roman conquest of Egypt saw Egyptian deities being adopted into the Roman pantheon following a rebranding with Roman nomenclature. Even the Catholic Saints have a correlation with ancient polytheistic deities such as the Patron Saint of Pregnant Women instead of the Goddess of Fertility. This is the process of acculturation and can help to explain the origins of intergroup conflict among religions.

Strategies to Reduce Conflict

Following the many causes and contributing factors of religious conflict, there are potential resolutions to intergroup conflict among groups such as different religions. One such approach, described by Ditlmann, Samii, and Zeitzoff (2017), examines the effect of a bottom up approach. Currently, researchers and policy makers focus on improving attitudes about different groups and conflict (Ditlmann, Samii, and Zeitzoff, 2017). However, this approach is minimally effective, if at all, and thus researchers need to focus instead on behavior, resources, and contextual conditions that restrain behavior (Ditlmann, Samii, and Zeitzoff, 2017). Under this approach, the target of interventions would not be entire groups, but the individuals within these groups. This type of resolution is bottom up as it targets the individuals in hopes they will spread the intervention up the chain (Ditlmann, Samii, and Zeitzoff, 2017).

This intervention strategy has many positive aspects and the potential to be very effective. According to Ditlmann, Samii, and Zeitzoff (2017), this type of intervention strategy shows promise by increasing positive feelings towards the outgroup among individuals, who then take these positive feelings and engage in policing of the ingroup, public advocacy, and political action. All if which can contribute to the overall acceptance of peace between groups (Ditlmann, Samii, and Zeitzoff, 2017).

Another potential resolution approach for reducing or eliminating intergroup religious conflict is with the media. Even during the first and second world wars, the media was used to promote or downplay certain social opinions about groups, strategies, etc. (Paluck, 2009). Paluck (2009) examined the use of media in the 1994 Rwandan Tutsi massacre. It was found that radio rhetoric played an instigating role in the massacre of most of the Tutsi minority. However, how is this confirmation of negative effects a resolution? Further research by Paluck (2009) discovered that radio programs intended to promote positive attitudes and behaviors among the Rwandan locals influenced listeners’ perceptions of social norms measured by realized behaviors.

For religious conflict this holds great promise. One of the biggest ideas behind many religious groups is being the one true religion, such is the case in Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. This rhetoric, promoted in radio, television, and music from each faith, can alter perceptions of other groups in a negative light. However, media geared towards promoting positive interactions between these groups may not alter personal beliefs, it will create a measured improvement in civil behavior (Paluck, 2009).

Another potential resolution is interaction. As mentioned previously, one potential cause of conflict comes from the minimal group paradigm in which categorization without interaction often results in ingroup favoritism (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). According to Nielsen (1998), many people see religious conflict as inevitable, but often act in ways to avoid it. However, Nielsen (1998) goes on to describe the effect that interaction has on religious conflict. Research shows that interactions between people of different groups engaging in religious conflict can promote positive resolutions to the conflict (Nielsen, 1996). For the concept of religious conflict, much intergroup contact is nonexistent between the conflicting groups is nonexistent or minimal at best. Contact between the groups, to create a resolution to conflict, can often lead to a greater understanding between the groups which can provide long-lasting conflict resolution.

Resolution and Social Change

Mentioned above are several potential causes and resolutions to religious conflict. First, the resolution of a bottom up approach in which targeted interventions focus on the individual versus the overall group. This resolution has the potential for great social change by altering individual beliefs and attitudes. This in turn creates the opportunity for more individuals to engage in activism targeting the conflict between groups. For religious conflict, this bottom up approach may not necessarily alter religious beliefs, but it can alter the socially acceptable beliefs about other religious groups, which can then alter behaviors, attitudes, perceptions, and bias. Furthermore, by targeting the individual, that individual can then pass on that intervention strategy to other individuals, whereas a top-down approach may not spread in such a way.

The second resolution that was mentioned was the use of media to promote positive rhetoric about religious intergroup cooperation. This has the potential for major social change. Media is consumed in almost every country, and there are so many different forms of media (radio, tv, video games, print, etc.) that there is infinite possibility for social change from this approach. By providing positive rhetoric through media materials, the international message of intergroup cooperation can be spread to more than just one group at time, promoting coexistence and not just positive interactions.

The third resolution is the use of interaction between groups to promote positive intergroup religious contact. Many groups often don’t interact with one another before negative attitudes are adopted as truth (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). By creating the opportunity for these various religious groups to interact with one another, the potential for change is created as well. This approach can accomplish social change through the application of learning and experience. Interacting with a group you may not normally interact with; a cultural rapport is built that can alter future behaviors and attitudes.

Overall, the opportunity for social change regarding religious conflict is rather large. Whether social change comes in the form of individuals, groups, families, communities, or governments, social change is possible as there is a potential strategy that can be applied in any context. These approaches, whether bottom-up individual oriented or top-down group oriented, can alter the perceptions, attitudes, or behaviors of religious groups to better create a cooperative paradigm for intergroup contact.

References

Chua, R. Y. J. (2013). The costs of ambient cultural disharmony: Indirect intercultural conflicts in social environment undermine creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 56(6), 1545-1577. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0971

Ditlmann, R. K., Samii, C., & Zeitzoff, T. (2017). Addressing Violent Intergroup Conflict from the Bottom Up? Social Issues & Policy Review, 11(1), 38–77. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1111/sipr.12027

Fiske, S. T. (2014). Social beings: core motives in social psychology (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Fiske, S. T., Gilbert, D. T., & Lindzey, G. E. (2010). Handbook of social psychology (5th ed., Vol. 1). Wiley.

Henriques, G. J. B., Simon, B., Ispolatov, Y., & Doebeli, M. (2019). Acculturation drives the evolution of intergroup conflict. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(28), 14089–14097. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1073/pnas.1810404116

Hogg, M. A., & Cooper, J. (2007). The Sage handbook of social psychology: concise student edition. Los Angeles: Sage.

Muggah, R., & Velshi, A. (2019, February 25). Religious violence is on the rise. What can faith-based communities do about it? Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/02/how-should-faith-communities-halt-the-rise-in-religious-violence/

Neuberg, S. L., Warner, C. M., Mistler, S. A., Berlin, A., Hill, E. D., Johnson, J. D., … Schober, J. (2014). Religion and Intergroup Conflict: Findings From the Global Group Relations Project. Psychological Science (0956-7976), 25(1), 198–206. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1177/0956797613504303

Nielsen, M. E. (1998). An assessment of religious conflicts and their resolutions. The Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, (1), 181. Retrieved from https://search-ebscohost-com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsgea&AN=edsgcl.20576301&site=eds-live&scope=site

Paluck, E. L. (2009). Reducing intergroup prejudice and conflict using the media: A field experiment in Rwanda. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(3), 574–587. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1037/a0011989.supp (Supplemental)

Seul, J. R. (1999). `Ours is the Way of God’: Religion, Identity, and Intergroup Conflict. Journal of Peace Research, 36(5), 553. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1177/0022343399036005004

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (The Nelson-Hall series in psychology) (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Burnham.