Intergroup Influences on the Stereotype Consistency Bias in Communication - Research Paper Example

A Reaction Paper To Tim Kurz’s Research Paper En d ‘Intergroup influences on the stereotype consistency bias in communication: Does it matter whowe are communicating about and to whom we are communicating?’ Communication is the key to the meeting of the minds between individuals and groups. Since the art of the communication is a dynamic process whereby individuals and groups interact at certain levels, communication stereotypes often develop within groups. The research paper of Tim Kurz seeks to provide the readers a clearer picture as to how different members within the group communicate with each other. The article also aimed to establish a pattern of communication between different types of groups. The study conducted by Kurz focused more on the “discussions between in-group dyads about an out-group, or a member of an out-group” (Kurz, 2009. p. 894). Technically, what Kurz wanted to achieve in his study is to understand the dynamics of communications within a given group and how this dynamics affect the individuals within and outside of the group. According to Kurz, “the prevalence of stereotypical descriptions in discussions of out-groups within in-group dyads may stem from a desire to affirm shared beliefs about the out-group”(Kurz, 2009. p. 893). In the article, Kurz described stereotyping as a means for the individual to gain favor within the group. By surveying the various communication stereotypes, the author hoped to identify useful means of communication that individuals and groups can use to gain favors from each other. Research Method In conducting the research, Kurz relied on the dyad and group discussion paradigms to get the data and other information that he needed. He also tried to investigate the ways on how narratives of group members are reproduced among the other members of the group and used effectively. In drawing his hypothesis, Kurz relied on a study of related literature that points out that those narratives about group members when communicated to other members tend to be “stripped of stereotype inconsistent information (SI), with stereotype consistent (SC) information being retained” (Kurz, 2009, p. 895). Accordingly, the stereotype consistency bias can be attributed to the communication process by which the information passes from one person to another rather than a result of general memory biases (Wigboldus, et al, 2005). In other words, as the message from an outside source is repeated within the group and is passed from one group member to another, the message now takes on a more familiar context and meaning. Technically, what happens here is that the group member who passed the message to another group member lends credence to the message thus the message adopts a consistent stereotype and becomes more acceptable to the other members of the group (Hanke, 2009). Another point that the study wanted to explore was relatively under-theorized study of interpersonal communication in the inter-group context is affected by the “relationship between the group memberships of the communicator, the audience, and target” (Kurz, 2009, p. 896). Kurz pointed out that relationship can have tremendous effects on the ability of groups to interact and communicate. His hypothesis is that by adopting the Self Categorization Theory (SCT) perspective, one can arrive at a conclusion that stereotypical cognitive representations in social groups are influenced by context upon which these communicative interactions are measured. The research initially embarks into an ambitious tasks of observing the communication patterns of different groups but due to the inherit limitations in terms of time and resources, the research was limited to observing scenario describing the behavior of one individual, rather than of multiple group members. Yet, despite the limitations of the study, the author was able to present clear indications and evidences that communication stereotypes indeed play a vital role in the interactions of groups and individuals in different social contexts. Results of the Study The results of the study demonstrate the importance of defining the nature of social communicative context when it comes to studying communication stereotypes. In presenting the results of the study, Kurz wrote “…the SC bias commonly observed in the reproduction of narratives was found to be dependent upon the specific inter-group or intra-group communicative context. When communicating to another in-group member about an out-group member, participants displayed a clear SC bias. However, when communicating to an in-group member about another member of the in-group, participants showed the reverse effect, an SI bias.” This proved the hypothesis of Kurz that the behavior of people tend to be different when dealing with the members of their own group and when dealing with people who are outside of their group. Clearly, the pattern of communication changes as the relationship between the subject changes. Interesting enough, the study conducted by Kurz found out that both the out-group stereotype consistent bias and the in-group stereotype inconsistent bias failed to occur on a significant level when the subject of the communication belongs to an out-group member. In comparing these results with related literatures that studied the Linguistic Expectancy Bias effect, Kurz found out that the effect stereotype consistent bias and stereotype inconsistent bias of groups are not the same as the effect of Linguistic Expectancy Bias in inter-group and intra-group context (Kurz, 2009). He noted that there is no Linguistic Expectancy Bias in intra-group context. Implications of the Study The study conducted by Kurz is relevant not only to groups of people but also among individuals. We have to understand that communication is a universal process which help people relate to each other. By understanding the different types of communication strategies that individuals and groups assume when dealing with each other, it will be easier for us to understand the actions and reactions of individuals and groups in different settings (Wigboldus et al, 2005). Moreover, understanding the development of communication stereotypes is important in the sense that stereotypes provide very predictable patterns of actions and reactions to certain stimuli (Warner, 2008). When we know how a certain individual or group of individuals will react to certain stimulus, it will be easier for us to anticipate their actions. In the same manner, when groups assume predictable patterns of communication towards other groups, it will be easier for these groups to relate to each other under certain environments (Hanke, 2009). Understanding the way individuals and groups communicate is very important especially when we work with a team. As pointed out by Kurz, individuals relate and communicate with each other in a certain context (Kurz, 2009), thus, if we want to build a dynamic team, we need to create structural and functional arrangements that are designed to achieve a unified goal (Hanke, 2009). Note that each member of the team has different ideas and communication style so if we want to build a team that is cohesive, we need to bring the members of the team to a certain level of understanding so that the members can relate to each other easily. The need to establish a certain pattern of communication is essential especially when the members of the group come from diverse backgrounds (Warner, 2008). By establishing communication stereotypes within the group, members of the group will now be guided accordingly as to how they should respond to certain situations. We have to understand that individual members of the group may have competing interests and if we do not establish norms of behavior within the group, the member have a difficult time relating with each other. Stereotyping is a critical factor in creating a strong, functional and dynamic team (Ruscher, 2006). For instance, if we want to create a functional team to work on a marketing project, we need to come up a clear and unified goal that all members of the team can understand and relate to. By putting the activities of the team on a certain context, the members of the team will now develop certain stereotypes that will help them understand and relate to each other accordingly. In our example, since the marketing team is not only expected to sell the products of their company but also to serve as the representatives of the company to the outside world, the members of the team are expected to act in accordance with the goals and objectives of the company. In this context, the establishment of stereotypes is crucial is the sense that stereotypes will dictate the way that the individual members of the team should react in a given setting. The development of communication stereotypes is very important as the members of the team deals with people outside of their group. As pointed out by Kurz, individuals belonging to the same group tend to act and communicate in the same manner to outsiders. The stereotype consistent acts of the members of the team are very important to send a clear message to the outside world. Going back to our example of a marketing team, in order to project a certain image of their company, the marketing team needs to act consistently with the goals and visions of their company. For instance, if the company wants to maintain an image of an organization that gives excellent service to its clients, it must establish an in-group communication stereotype that is consistent with its goals. Establishing stereotypes become even more important when the team belongs to a large organization and the different divisions of the organization will have to rely on each other for mutual support (Ruscher, 2006). Communication between cross-functional teams can be quite challenging especially if the teams in themselves have no established patterns of communications or stereotypes. We have to understand that strategic alliances between teams depend largely on the ability of its members to relate to each other at a certain level (Ruscher, 2006). If a contemporary organization does not have any communication stereotypes can the members of cross-functional teams can adapt, it will be difficult for the teams to work together. Another important aspect that we should learn from the study conducted by Kurz is the fact that the relationship of individuals and groups can affect their communication patterns. We have to understand that teams are often internally structured and these internal structures are often characterized by the status, powers and prestige that each member enjoys in the team (Ruscher, 2006). As pointed out by Kurz, the relationship of the members of the team often influences the communication stereotypes within the group. A good example of how the relationship of the members of the team affects their communication patterns can be seen inside the family. Note that in a family, the parents have more authority over their kids so they tend to wield more powers in terms of decision-making and other aspects that concern the family. As the parents often enjoy more privileges compared to their children, the behavior of a child towards their parents may vary from their behavior towards his or her siblings. Relationship does not only influence the communication patterns and stereotypes between individuals but rather, it also affects the way groups or teams relate to each other (Kurz, 2009). In big organizations, the hierarchy or rank of the different divisions or groups can affect the way the other divisions or groups communicate with each other. The balance of power the organization often tip towards the higher ranking group so the higher ranking group often adapts different communication stereotypes than those groups that are of lower rank (Ruscher, 2006; Clark, 2007). Conclusion Productivity and organizational capabilities are developed through intense social and communicative processes. Intra-group and inter-group communication dynamics vary from one group to another and each group eventually develop its own communication stereotypes that distinguish it from the other groups. The developments of communication stereotypes among groups help establish a kind of norm that governs the relationships between the individual members of the groups. The stereotypes developed by each group also affect its relationship with other groups. Since communication stereotypes play vital roles in the different communication processes within and outside of the group, it is therefore of utmost important that we understand the dynamics and development of communication stereotypes. References Clark, A. E., & Kashima, Y. (2007). Stereotypes help people connect with others in the community: A situated functional analysis of the stereotype consistency bias in communication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(6), 1028-1039. Hanke, S. (2009). Communication styles: What is your impact on others? Professional Safety (May 2009), 22-25. Kurz, T. (2009). Intergroup influences on the stereotype consistency bias in communication: Does it Matter who we are communicating about and who we are communicating to? Social Cognition, 7(6), 893-904. Ruscher, J., & Hammer, E. (2006). The development of shared stereotypic impressions in conversation: An emerging model, methods, and extensions to cross-group settings. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 25, 221-243. Warner, F. (2008). Improving communication: It’s Everybody’s business. Change (Nov- Dec), 29-35 Wigboldus, D., Spears, R., & Semin, G. (2005). When do we communicate stereotypes?: Influence of the social context on the linguistic expectancy bias. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 8, 215-230. Read More