Prejudice and intergroup relations: WACE Year 12 Psychology Unit 4
“Explain prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination, social identity theory, and strategies to reduce intergroup conflict, with reference to Tajfel, Sherif and Allport”
Prejudice is a negative attitude toward a group, stereotyping is the belief component and discrimination is the behaviour; Tajfel's social identity theory explains prejudice through in-group favouritism, Sherif's Robbers Cave study showed competition breeds conflict that superordinate goals can resolve, and Allport's contact hypothesis sets out the conditions under which contact reduces prejudice.
Jump to a section
Prejudice and intergroup relations are not part of the SCSA Psychology ATAR Year 12 syllabus (Units 3 and 4, taught since 2024), so this page is not examined in the WACE Psychology ATAR exam. Prejudice, social identity theory and the Robbers Cave study (Sherif et al., 1954) are now in the Year 11 syllabus (Unit 2: Attitudes, stereotypes and social influence). The nearest Year 12 content is social and cultural stressors in stress and stressors.
What this dot point is asking
SCSA asks you to define prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination, explain social identity theory, describe Sherif's and Allport's work, and outline strategies to reduce intergroup conflict. The marked skill is distinguishing the attitude, belief and behaviour and naming the right reduction strategy.
Prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination
These three terms are related but distinct, mapping onto the tri-component view of attitudes.
- A stereotype is a generalised, often oversimplified belief about the members of a group (the cognitive component).
- Prejudice is a negative attitude or feeling toward a group based on membership alone (the affective component).
- Discrimination is unfair behaviour or treatment directed at a group or its members (the behavioural component).
Stereotyping can lead to prejudice, which can lead to discrimination, though they do not always occur together.
Social identity theory
Henri Tajfel's social identity theory explains why prejudice arises so readily. People derive part of their self-concept from the groups they belong to (their social identity), so they are motivated to see their own group, the in-group, favourably compared with other groups, the out-groups.
Three processes drive this.
- Social categorisation: we sort people into groups, including ourselves.
- Social identification: we adopt the identity of our in-group.
- Social comparison: we compare our in-group favourably against out-groups to boost self-esteem.
Tajfel's minimal group studies showed that simply dividing people into arbitrary groups was enough to produce in-group favouritism, even with no competition or prior contact.
Social identity theory holds that part of a person's self-concept comes from membership of social groups, so people favour their in-group over out-groups to maintain positive self-esteem. This in-group favouritism is a root of prejudice and discrimination.
Sherif's Robbers Cave study
Muzafer Sherif studied intergroup conflict at a boys' summer camp. Two groups of boys, initially unaware of each other, developed strong in-group identities. When the researchers introduced competition for prizes, hostility, name-calling and aggression quickly developed between the groups.
The conflict was reduced not by mere contact, which made things worse, but by superordinate goals: tasks that required both groups to cooperate, such as restarting a stalled truck. Working toward shared goals that neither group could achieve alone reduced hostility and built friendships across groups.
Sherif found that competition produced conflict, but cooperation toward superordinate goals (shared goals requiring both groups) reduced it. Simply bringing hostile groups together without cooperative goals did not help and could worsen conflict.
Allport's contact hypothesis
Gordon Allport proposed the contact hypothesis: contact between groups reduces prejudice, but only under certain conditions. The groups must have equal status in the situation, share common goals, cooperate rather than compete, and have the support of authorities, laws or customs. Without these conditions, contact alone can entrench prejudice.
Strategies to reduce intergroup conflict
Drawing these together, prejudice and conflict can be reduced by:
- Superordinate goals that require cooperation (Sherif).
- Equal-status, cooperative contact with institutional support (Allport).
- Education and increasing intergroup knowledge to challenge stereotypes.
- Promoting a shared, superordinate identity so out-group members are recategorised as part of a larger in-group.
Two rival school houses
Two school houses are increasingly hostile after a competitive sports carnival.
Simply seating them together in assembly (mere contact) is unlikely to help and may worsen tension. A more effective approach, following Sherif, is to set a superordinate goal, such as a joint fundraising project that needs both houses to succeed, with equal-status cooperation and staff support as Allport's conditions require.
A precise answer names the superordinate goal and links it to the contact conditions.
Why this matters
Understanding prejudice informs anti-discrimination programs, reconciliation, multicultural policy and conflict resolution. It draws together attitudes, group influence and cross-cultural psychology into one applied problem.
- Blurring the three terms
- Stereotype is the belief, prejudice is the attitude, discrimination is the behaviour. Keep them distinct.
- Saying contact alone reduces prejudice
- Allport's conditions (equal status, common goals, cooperation, institutional support) are required; unconditioned contact can worsen prejudice.
- Misreading Robbers Cave
- Competition created the conflict and superordinate goals resolved it, not mere contact.
- Forgetting in-group favouritism
- Tajfel showed even arbitrary group membership produces favouritism, so prejudice does not require real competition to begin.
Exam-style questions
Questions in the style of SCSA exam questions on this dot point, each with a worked answer. They are written by ExamExplained unless tagged "Past paper"; the year shows the paper a question is modelled on.
Original5 marksDistinguish between stereotyping, prejudice and discrimination, and explain how they relate to the tri-component model of attitudes.Show worked answer →
A 5 mark response needs the three terms distinguished and mapped onto the attitude components.
- Stereotype
- A generalised, often oversimplified belief about the members of a group, corresponding to the cognitive component of an attitude.
- Prejudice
- A negative attitude or feeling toward a group based on membership alone, corresponding to the affective component.
- Discrimination
- Unfair behaviour or treatment directed at a group or its members, corresponding to the behavioural component.
- Relationship
- Stereotyping can lead to prejudice, which can lead to discrimination, though they do not always occur together (a person may hold prejudice without acting on it).
Markers reward the belief-attitude-behaviour distinction and the correct mapping to the cognitive, affective and behavioural components.
Original8 marksExplain how social identity theory accounts for prejudice, and discuss two strategies that could reduce intergroup conflict, referring to relevant research.Show worked answer →
An 8 mark extended response needs social identity theory plus two evidence-based strategies.
- Social identity theory (Tajfel)
- Part of the self-concept comes from group membership, so people favour their in-group to maintain self-esteem, through social categorisation, social identification and social comparison. The minimal group studies showed even arbitrary group membership produces in-group favouritism, a root of prejudice.
- Strategy one: superordinate goals (Sherif)
- In the Robbers Cave study, competition produced conflict, but shared goals requiring cooperation reduced hostility and built cross-group friendships.
- Strategy two: contact under Allport's conditions
- Contact reduces prejudice only with equal status, common goals, cooperation and institutional support; without these, contact can worsen prejudice.
- Conclusion
- Markers reward the three social identity processes, two correctly attributed strategies, and the point that contact alone is insufficient.