Intergroup harmony refers to having a positive and harmonious relationship within the group. The characteristic of this concept is that the members within the same group respect each other, and
prejudice and conflict are reduced. The main component of this concept would be the members within the same group having equal status and
cooperation among the group. This is essential for cultivating intergroup harmony because cooperation and equal status create a condition to reduce
bias and enhance mutual understanding within the group. There are several approaches to foster harmony among the group. One of the methods is keeping positive intergroup contact, which helps reduce
stereotypes and
prejudices. Also, using dual-identity frameworks and electronic contact would be effective in improving relationships and alleviating
intergroup anxiety. However, there is a possibility that intergroup harmony brings negative impacts to the group. Harmony may sustain inequalities if there are power imbalances that have not yet been addressed and the intervention did not consider social, political, and cultural contexts. This concept is provided by the
Social Identity Theory and
Contact Theory and is the theoretical basis for understanding and improving intergroup relations.
Intergroup harmony is also a branch of social psychology which is often studied within the framework of
Social Identity Theory It is important for many reasons including reduced prejudice, increased psychological well-being, increased economic status, and increased identity security for members of both groups.
Henri Tajfel did another experiment in the "
minimal group paradigm" experiments. This experiment shows that when there is no competition,
intergroup bias arises by separating the members into different categories. Also, according to the
Intergroup Threat Theory (2015), attitudes and behaviours towards outgroups would be influenced by the realistic or symbolic threats perceived. Moreover, Vescio et al. (2004) suggested and verified the
Crossed-Categorization Hypothesis. In this hypothesis, a conclusion is that
intergroup bias would be reduced by weakening category distinctions when any categories overlap. This hypothesis provides thoughts on cultivating intergroup harmony, although there would still be bias because of the existence of
in-group favouritism or prejudice. There are multiple experts who contribute to this theory. Muzafer Sherif is one of the professionals who is famous for foundational experiments on conflict and cooperation in groups. The
Robbers Cave Experiment is one of his well-known experiments that contributes to the concepts of intergroup harmony. Henri Tajfel is another expert. He is the developer of the Social Identity Theory, and he also suggested the minimal group paradigm" experiments. These two theories are essential for the study of intergroup harmony.
Definition and importance Intergroup harmony can be defined as the state of peaceful coexistence between the members of different societal, cultural, political, ethnic or identity groups, where there is an understanding from both groups to achieve common, shared goals, and a reduction in feelings of
prejudice,
discrimination or
stereotyping. On the intergroup relations continuum (IRC), harmony falls on the extreme, with conflict as the other extreme, and is viewed as the goal for group situations, due to the minimal prejudice that occurs, and is therefore essential for enhancing and enriching collaboration in diverse societies and its importance has led to many decades of research about the most effective way to reach the optimum level of intergroup harmony. Intergroup harmony varies cross-culturally. There are currently two well-recognised cultures in the world:
collectivist and
individualistic. To measure the cross-cultural differences between intergroup harmony, one study measured the levels of interpersonal forgiveness of a person depending on how close they feel to the offender. This demonstrates the differences in cultures, where intergroup harmony is more highly emphasised in collectivist cultures. The main, and arguably, most important reason for promoting, achieving and maintaining intergroup harmony is the reduction of prejudice and discrimination between groups of people. Lower levels of stereotyping and biases lead to lower levels of violence and tension between groups, creating a peaceful coexistence. Reducing
anxiety about interacting with members from the out-group, and having
empathy and
perspective-taking are the mechanisms for having this benefit. At the community level, positive intergroup interactions are common, and this would make it simpler to influence
social norms and reduce
stereotypes even if there is not existing any direct contact between individuals, especially in this diverse society. Moreover, other positive impacts would be having benefits on the economic and educational levels. For the benefits in the economic category, having intergroup harmony would enhance the productivity of the team. Having intergroup harmony reduces challenges and conflict within the group and has a more equal distribution of resources. This allows the members of the team to focus more on their work rather than being concerned about striving for more resources. This also allows the members of the organisation to see greater networking, effort, and task coordination, which significantly enhances the productivity of the economy. And for the benefits in the educational category, this allows students to have better preparation for the globalised world. An inclusive environment reduces
bias, and
discrimination would be created by the academic environment. This enhanced the
collaborations between students, which fostered the atmosphere within the school more harmonious. This would also be an improvement in academic outcomes and the development of cross-cultural competencies allows the student to be more competitive in the global environment. In conclusion, enhanced economic productivity and better educational outcomes would be seen in societies with higher intergroup harmony as discrimination decreases and more cooperation exists.
Empirical evidence There are several pieces of evidence showing the existence of intergroup harmony. One of the examples would be happening in
South Africa. In
South Africa, after the
apartheid era from 1948 to 1994, the
Truth and Reconciliation Commission promoted restorative justice and racial understanding to address apartheid-era abuses. The commission focuses on truth-telling and amnesty, supporting
social integration and
democratic transition. However, critics argue that these policies do not fully address the needs of victims or systemic inequalities. Another example would be the
Good Friday Agreement in
Northern Ireland. In 1998, the
Good Friday Agreement was signed, and this agreement emphasised power-sharing and cross-community initiatives. This allows the citizens in
Northern Ireland to have a similar status to fulfil the requirement of not having extreme differences in status. This has reduced violence and encouraged
collaboration between Catholics and Protestants. However, continued segregation in education and neighbourhoods is still a challenge that harms intergroup harmony. Moreover, in
Rwanda, after the 1994
genocide,
Gacaca courts were utilised for community-based justice. The courts are used for fostering accountability and reconciliation. Intergroup harmony has also been cultivated through education reforms that integrate peacebuilding and conflict resolution into school curricula.
Toronto and
New York are the cities that have intergroup harmony. There are inclusive policies and cultural festivals to celebrate the diversity of the city, fostering i
ntergroup dialogue and reducing
prejudice. However,
economic inequality and disparities in access to affordable housing are still the challenges hindering comprehensive social integration.
Debates about intergroup harmony There are numerous debates towards intergroup harmony. Sustaining
inequality is one of the negative arguments about intergroup harmony.
Historical narratives would affect the legitimacy of
social inequalities. As historical narratives can be changed, there might be an agreement within the harmonious intergroup that ignores
historical contexts or changes the historical narratives. This might transfer the problem of intergroup conflict to interpersonal relations. Also if the intergroup threat perceptions forcing group-based inequality are seen as legal and acceptable, this would maintain and persist social inequalities. However, the problem of inequality can be improved by having positive intergroup contact. Positive intergroup contact significantly enhances collective action among advantaged group members. This can reduce
social dominance orientation and improve the inequality problem by taking further actions. The advantaged group members would have a higher probability to engage in collective action supporting disadvantaged groups when the advantaged group members engage in discussions about power imbalances during intergroup contact. This will also be improved when the advantaged group helps the disadvantaged groups to maintain an equal status within the intergroup. Another negative argument would be reduced collective action motivation. Some arguments state that the motivation of marginalised groups for collective action would reduced when promoting intergroup harmony through common identity frameworks. When disadvantaged group members are encouraged to adopt a shared identity with advantaged groups, they may experience reduced group-based anger and perceive inequalities as less severe, decreasing their willingness to push for social change. Another argument would be promoting intergroup harmony would distract the members from social change goals. The goals of the advantaged groups and the disadvantaged groups might be different. They might change their goals because of intergroup harmony forcing them not to oppose the ideas.
Achieving intergroup harmony Intergroup harmony is important to obtain in any situation where members of diverse groups are present. The ways in which to maximally achieve harmony have been debated; however three main theories have emerged: the contact hypothesis, and more recently the use of music and sports to promote harmony. Allport's theory itself drew on previous research about desegregation in the workplace and housing options for black people in the USA. A second way intergroup harmony can be applied to the real world is in the workplace, where intergroup harmony creates motivated employers, who do efficient, high quality work. In workplaces all over the world, intergenerational conflict can cause ineffective work, due to the ageism faced by both older and younger co-workers. To stop these issues, it is important to create a harmonious working environment. Recently, it was found that when intergroup harmony was achieved via a higher level of quality contact time between the two age groups in the office, task and relationship conflict was highly decreased, leading to more efficient and happier colleagues, which in turn leads to the production of higher quality work. This even has wider connotations in the world of social change, as intergroup harmony can foster social change in many other aspects of life. increasing intergroup harmony can increase the cohesion of these families. When the whole family is viewed as one group, children have reported feeling an elevated sense of harmony in the family, leading to higher levels of psychological well-being and greater positive contact from all members.
Criticism Intergroup harmony has many implications in the real world, and often involves cooperative, positive interactions; however, when power dynamics are not considered, these encounters can fall through. When power dynamics are ignored, the lower status group seeks to reach a more equal state, whereas the higher status group attempts to maintain the current equality level. This leads to differing views about the current state of equality and can cause negative attitudes towards the groups, as they are no longer attempting to reach a shared goal, but instead attempting to reach different goals, which benefit their ingroup more than the outgroup. This can lead to conflict, even when the initial aim was to reach a harmonious state. Furthering from causing conflict due to power inequalities, intergroup harmony can also lead people to have false expectations about equality. When contact between two groups was commonality based, outgroup members expected more fairness from ingroup members, as tested by an experiment, when students were separated into two lab groups, and the ingroup were assigned to divide credits to the outgroup members. In 2011, Maoz provided evidence for this theory using the attempts for coexistence between Israeli Jews and Palestinians. Although there is much research on the promotion of intergroup harmony in general, little is said about promoting harmony in groups who are facing protracted asymmetrical disputes, and attempts to promote intergroup harmony can also lead to further problems between these groups, as contact can cause distress and lead to further negative attitudes about the other group. == Current directions ==