Hindu and Muslim college students judged the severity of a riot and attributed blame for that riot to the Hindu community, the Muslim community and the individual offenders. Both Hindu and Muslim students showed an ingroup bias, in that when offenders were from participants’ own religious group, they blamed the offenders the most and their own community the least. However, when the offenders were from the other religious group, students (both Hindus and Muslims) blamed the other religious community. Two results were consistent with the research literature on equal status intergroup contact. First, the amount of contact Hindu students had with Muslims was negatively related to their assignment of blame to offenders. Second, Hindu participants who lived in mixed Hindu–Muslim neighbourhoods were less likely to blame the Muslim community.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allport, G.W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley .
2.
Altemeyer, B. , & Hunsberger, B.E. (1992). Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest, and prejudice . International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 2 (2), 113–133 .
3.
Ansari, M.J. (1981). Fraternalistic relative deprivation and styles of conflict resolution. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Allahabad, Allahabad.
4.
Brewer, M.B. , & Miller, N. (1996). Intergroup relations. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole .
5.
Brophy, I.N. (1946). The luxury of anti-Negro prejudice . Public Opinion Quarterly, 9, 456–466 .
6.
Campbell, D.T. (1958). Common fate, similarity, and other indices of status of aggregates of persons as social entitites . Behavioral Science, 3 (1), 14–25 .
7.
Dalbert, C. (1999). The world is more just for me than generally: About the personal belief in a just world's scale validity . Social Justice Research, 12 (2), 79–98 .
8.
Doosje, B. , & Branscombe, N.R. (2003). Attributions for the negative historical actions of a group . European Journal of Social Psychology, 33 (2), 235–248 .
9.
Duncan, B.L. (1976). Differential social perception and attribution of intergroup violence: Testing the lower limits of stereotyping of Blacks . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34 (4), 590–598 .
10.
Ghosh, E.S.K. , Kumar, R. , & Tripathi, R.C. (1992). The communal cauldron: Relations between Hindus and Muslims in India and their reactions to norm violations. In R.C. Tripathi & R. DeRidder (Eds), Norm violation and intergroup relations (pp. 70–89). New York: Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press .
11.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: John Wiley .
12.
Hewstone, M. (1990). The “ultimate attribution error”? A review of the literature on intergroup causal attribution . European Journal of Social Psychology, 20 (4), 311–335 .
13.
Hunter, J.A. , Stringer, M. , & Watson, R.P. (1991). Intergroup violence and intergroup attributions . British Journal of Social Psychology, 30 (3), 261–266 .
14.
Islam, M.R. , & Hewstone, M. (1993). Dimensions of contact as predictors of intergroup anxiety, perceived out-group variability, and out-group attitude: An integrative model . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19 (6), 700–710 .
15.
Kumar, R. (1999). Intergroup relations among Hindus, Muslims, and Christians: Some perceptions . Paper presented at the convention of NAOP. University of Lucknow, Lucknow.
16.
Lickel, B. , Schmader, T. , & Hamilton, D.L. (2003). A case of collective responsibility: Who else was to blame for the Columbine High School shootings?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29 (2), 194–204 .
17.
Manshardt, C. (1936). The Hindu-Muslim problem in India. London, England: George Allen & Unwin .
18.
Mullen, B. , Brown, R. , & Smith, C. (1992). Ingroup bias as a function of salience, relevance, and status: An integration . European Journal of Social Psychology, 22 (2), 103–122 .
19.
Naqvi, N. (1980). Relative deprivation and attribution of blame in communal riots. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Allahabad, Allahabad.
20.
Pettigrew, T.F. (1979). The ultimate attribution error: Extending Allport's cognitive analysis of prejudice . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5 (4), 461–476 .
21.
Pettigrew, T.F. , & Tropp, L.R. (2005). Allport's intergroup contact hypothesis: Its history and influence. In J.F. Dovidio , P. Glick & L.A. Rudman (Eds), On the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after Allport (pp. 262–277). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing .
22.
Pettigrew, T.F. , & Tropp, L.R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90 (5), 751–783 .
23.
Saxena, N.C. (1984). The nature and origin of communal riots in India. In A.A. Engineer (Ed.), Communal riots in post-independence India (pp. 51–67). Hyderabad: Sangam Books .
24.
Stouffer, S.A. , Schuman, E.A. , Devinney, L.C. , Star, S.A. , & Williams, R.M., JR. (1949). The American soldier: Adjustment during army life (Vol. 1). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press .
25.
Taylor, D.M. , & Jaggi, V. (1974). Ethnocentrism and causal attribution in a South Indian context . Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 5 (2), 162–171 .
26.
Tripathi, R.C. , & Srivastava, R. (1981). Relative deprivation and intergroup attitudes . European Journal of Social Psychology, 11 (3), 313–318 .
27.
Tropp, L.R. , & Pettigrew, T.F. (2005). Relationships between intergroup contact and prejudice among minority and majority status groups . Psychological Science, 16 (12), 951–957 .
28.
Varshney, A. (2002). Ethnic conflict and civic life: Hindus and Muslims in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press .
29.
Wilkinson, S.I. (1998). The electoral incentives for ethnic violence: Hindu–Muslim riots in India. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Massachusetts.
30.
Williams, R.M., JR. (1947). The reduction of intergroup tensions. New York: Social Science Research Council .
31.
Zajonc, R.B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(Monograph, Suppl. 2), 1–27 .
