Relations intergroupes : attribution à la discrimination et perception d'hostilité chez autrui

Résumé: La thèse que nous présentons s'intéresse aux phénomènes d'attribution d'intentions hostiles. Dodge (1980) observe que les individus agressifs ont tendance, en situation ambiguë, à sur-attribuer des intentions hostiles à leurs pairs, ce qui induit des réponses agressives. Pour l'auteur, l'attribution d'intentions hostiles est un médiateur entre certaines caractéristiques personnelles (l'agressivité) des individus, et le type de réponses qu'ils apportent aux situations. Cependant, les informations concernant l'appartenance groupale des "pairs" ne sont jamais prises en compte dans leurs études. Si ce processus est perméable à l'influence des normes et croyances (Bègue et Muller, 2006), aucune étude ne met en évidence quel serait l'impact d'informations groupales sur l'élaboration des réponses aux situations, dans le cadre de ce modèle. L'objectif de cette thèse est de montrer que l'attribution d'intentions hostiles peut être envisagée comme un processus agissant également à un niveau intergroupes et donc prenant en compte des informations groupales sur les individus. En s'inspirant du modèle de Dodge, nous avons émis l'hypothèse que les logiques intergroupes intervenaient dans l'interprétation des intentions des acteurs impliqués dans les interactions, afin de produire une réponse adaptée aux logiques intergroupes. Afin de tester cette hypothèse, nous avons suivi trois axes de recherches: Dans le premier de ces axes, nous avons introduit, dans le paradigme de Dodge, des informations .sur l'appartenance groupale des protagonistes de l'interaction (endogroupe vs exogroupe). Nous avons montré que le type de situation (ambiguë vs hostile) est moins important que l'information groupale dans la production d'une réponse à la situation (Étude 1). En outre, nous avons mis en évidence des processus différents selon la position des individus dans leur groupe (Étude 2). Dans le second axe, nous avons montré que si les différences de statut entre groupes n'influençaient pas directement le modèle de Dodge, elles interagissaient avec l'appartenance groupale et la clarté de la situation au niveau de l'attribution d'intentions hostiles (étude 3) et des intentions comportementales (Ettide 4). Dans le troisième et deriúer axe, nous avons introduit l'attribution d'intentions hostiles dans un processus de dévalorisation d'une cible expliquant un échec par la discrimination (Kaiser et Miller, 2001; 2003). Nous avons alors montré que l'attribution d'intentions hostiles médiatisait le lien entre l'attribution mobilisée pour expliquer l'événement et l'évaluation de la cible (Étude 5), et que ce type d'attribution était spécifique, aux intentions comportementales agressives (Études 6). Nous avons alors conclu sur la dimension sociale de l'attribution d'intentions hostiles et sur le fait qu'il s'agissait d'un élément permettant la construction d'une représentation des interactions sociales. Abstract The present thesis focuses on the phenomena of hostile intents attribution. Dodge (1980) observes that in ambiguous situations, aggressive people tend to over attribute hostile intents to others. This attribution leads them to respond aggressively. According to the author, hostile intents attribution mediates the link between some personal characteristics (aggressiveness for example) of individuals and their responses to the situation. However information related to participants group membership is always neglected in these studies. Begue and Muller (2006) showed that some beliefs could moderate the interaction between aggressiveness and hostile intents attribution on behaviors, but no study exhibited evidence of a similar effect with social information. The aim of this thesis is to show that hostile intents attribution needs to be considered at an intergroup level by taking into account people's group ineinbership. Based on the Dodge model, we formulated the hypothesis that intergroup strategies had an impact on actors' intents interpretations which in return should lead to different but adapted reactions to the situation. To test this hypothesis, three lines of research were developed. In the first line, we introduced, in the Dodge's paradigm, some information about the participants group membership (ingroup vs outgroup). We showed that when elaborating a response to a specific situation its nature (ambiguous vs hostile) had less impact than group membership information (Study 1). In addition, we highlighted some different processes according to the position of individuals in their group (Study 2). In the second line, we showed that if the differences between groups status didn't influence the Dodge model, they interacted with group membership and situation nature to influence hostile intents attribution (Study 3) and behaviors intents (Study 4). In the last line of research, we introduced hostile intents attribution within the process of derogation of a target explaining its failure by discrimination (Kaiser and Miller, 2001; 2003). We showed that hostile intents attribution mediated the link between the attibution mobilized to explain the failure and the derogation of the target (Study 5), and that this attribution type was specifically linked to aggressive behavior intents (Study 6). We finally concluded that hostile intents attribution imply an important social dimension which needs to be taken into account because involved in the construction of a representation of social interactions.

Support for a demographically based selection method at University: The role of competition

Building on the instrumental model of group conflict (IMGC), the present experiment investigates the support for discriminatory and meritocratic method of selections at university in a sample of local and immigrant students. Results showed that local students were supporting in a larger proportion selection method that favors them over immigrants in comparison to method that consists in selecting the best applicants without considering his/her origin. Supporting the assumption of the IMGC, this effect was stronger for locals who perceived immigrants as competing for resources. Immigrant students supported more strongly the meritocratic selection method than the one that discriminated them. However, contrasting with the assumption of the IMGC, this effect was only present in students who perceived immigrants as weakly competing for locals' resources. Results demonstrate that selection methods used at university can be perceived differently depending on students' origin. Further, they suggest that the mechanisms underlying the perception of discriminatory and meritocratic selection methods differ between local and immigrant students. Hence, the present experiment makes a theoretical contribution to the IMGC by delimiting its assumptions to the ingroup facing a competitive situation with a relevant outgroup. Practical implication for universities recruitment policies are discussed.

The skill paradox: Explaining and reducing employment discrimination against skilled immigrants

Using a social identity theory approach, we theorized that recruiters might be particularly biased against skilled immigrant applicants. We refer to this phenomenon as a skill paradox, according to which immigrants are more likely to be targets of employment discrimination the more skilled they are. Furthermore, building on the common ingroup identity model, we proposed that this paradox can be resolved through human resource management (HRM) strategies that promote inclusive hiring practices (e.g., by emphasizing fit with a diverse clientele). The results from a laboratory experiment were consistent with our predictions: Local recruiters preferred skilled local applicants over skilled immigrant applicants, but only when these applicants were qualified for a specific job. This bias against qualified and skilled immigrant applicants was attenuated when fit with a diverse clientele was emphasized, but not when fit with a homogeneous clientele was emphasized or when the hiring strategy was not explained. We discuss the implications of our findings for research on employment discrimination against skilled immigrants, including the role of inclusiveness for reducing discriminatory biases.