The DOI matches its Crossref record.
An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict
Abstract
The initial stimulus for the theorizing presented here was provided by certain experimental investigations of intergroup behavior. The laboratory analog of real-world ethnocentrism is in-group bias—that is, the tendency to favor the in-group over the out-group in evaluations and behavior. Not only are incompatible group interests not always sufficient to generate conflicts but there is a good deal of experimental evidence that these conditions are not always necessary for the development of competition and discrimination between groups (for example, Ferguson & Kelley, 1964; Rabbie & Wilkens, 1971; Doise & Sinclair, 1973; Doise & Weinberger, 1973).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Items 301–307 of 307
Age differences in attitudes about older adults with dementia
Newton, C., Hadjistavropoulos, T., Gallant, N. L., & MacNab, Y. C. (2021) · Ageing and Society · doi:10.1017/s0144686x19000965 · Cited by 8
El estudio de la polarización afectiva: una mirada metodológica
Freidin, E., Moro, R., & Silenzi, M. I. (2022) · REVISTA SAAP · doi:10.46468/rsaap.16.1.a2 · Cited by 5
Racial imposter syndrome and music performance anxiety: A case study.
Fraser, T. (2025) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs15081057 · Cited by 4
Cuéllar Rivero, R. (2024) · Revista Española de Ciencia Política · doi:10.21308/recp.64.07 · Cited by 3
Moral Observer-Licensing in Cyberspace
Ran, Y., Hou, Y., Dong, Z., & Wang, Q. (2022) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs12050148 · Cited by 1
We Wish to Tweet Our Own Cause—Theorizing Black Twitter
Clark, M. D. (2025) · We Tried to Tell Y'All · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190068141.003.0002
When Your AI Agent Succumbs to Peer-Pressure: Studying Opinion-Change Dynamics of LLMs
Mehdizadeh, A., & Hilbert, M. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.19107
Metadata
- Authors
- Tajfel, H., & Turner, J.
- Venue
- Organizational Identity
- Publisher
- Oxford University PressOxford
- Published
- 2000-03-18
- Pages
- 56-65
- OpenAlex
- W90970949
- Cited by
- 12,487
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 698.15
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
