Relations between high and low power groups: The importance of legitimacy

Using a social identity perspective, two experiments examined the effects of power and the legitimacy of power differentials on intergroup bias. In Experiment 1, 125 math-science students were led to believe that they had high or low representation in a university decision-making body relative to social-science students and that this power position was either legitimate or illegitimate. Power did not have an independent effect on bias; rather, members of both high and low power groups showed more bias when the power hierarchy was illegitimate than when it was legitimate. This effect was replicated in Experiment 2 (N =105). In addition, Experiment 2 showed that groups located within an unfair power hierarchy expected the superordinate power body to be more discriminatory than did those who had legitimately high or low power. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for group relations.

Apocalypse forever? International relations implications of 11 September

This is a contribution to ongoing discussion of the international relations issues raised by the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. It acknowledges apparent failings (of analysis or prediction) in the IR literature but then suggests the shortcomings are really the product of divergent traditions of analysis (behaviouralism, structuralism and evolutionism) which isolate different aspects of phenomena for attention. The paper then discusses the contrast between hard power and soft power - to help identify the distinctiveness of the new forms of terrorism (their non-linear objectives and the lack of proportionality involved). It concludes on an encouraging note by urging international cooperation as a solution, even in cases where the protagonists' resentments have tended to militate against conventional channels of dispute resolution.