Skip to main content
  • Other Publications
    • Philosophical Transactions B
    • Proceedings B
    • Biology Letters
    • Open Biology
    • Philosophical Transactions A
    • Proceedings A
    • Royal Society Open Science
    • Interface
    • Interface Focus
    • Notes and Records
    • Biographical Memoirs

Advanced

  • Home
  • Content
    • Latest issue
    • All content
    • Subject collections
    • Special features
    • Videos
  • Information for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Readers
    • Institutions
  • About us
    • About the journal
    • Editorial board
    • Author benefits
    • Policies
    • Citation metrics
    • Publication times
    • Open access
  • Sign up
    • Subscribe
    • eTOC alerts
    • Keyword alerts
    • RSS feeds
    • Newsletters
    • Request a free trial
  • Submit
You have accessRestricted access

Threat and parochialism in intergroup relations: lab-in-the-field evidence from rural Georgia

Max Schaub
Published 25 October 2017.DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2017.1560
Max Schaub
Carlo F. Dondena Centre for Research on Social Dynamics and Public Policy, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Max Schaub
  • For correspondence: max.schaub@unibocconi.it
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Competition between groups is widely considered to foster cooperation within groups. Evidence from laboratory experiments hints at the existence of a proximate mechanism by which humans increase their level of cooperation with their ingroup when faced with an external threat. Further work suggests that ingroup cooperation should go along with aggressive behaviour towards the outgroup, although these theories are at odds with others that see high investments in outgroup relations as important means of stabilizing intergroup relations. Surprisingly, few of these arguments have been tested in the field, and existing studies are also limited by the lack of a direct measure of threat perception and aggressive behaviour. This study presents lab-in-the-field results from a rural context where exposure to an ethnic outgroup varies between villages. This context makes it possible to capture levels of threat perception, aggressive behaviour and cooperation without inducing intergroup competition artificially in the laboratory. All concepts are measured behaviourally. In- and outgroup cooperation was measured with a standard public goods game, and a novel experimental protocol was developed that measures perceived threat and aggressive behaviour: the threat game. The results show that levels of perceived threat, ingroup cooperation and aggressive behaviour are higher in regions more strongly exposed to ethnic outsiders. However, exposed regions also show high levels of outgroup cooperation and a concomitant lack of elevated ingroup bias. This pattern is explained by theorizing that communities show parochial altruism when faced with an ethnic outgroup, but balance aggressive behaviour with cooperative offers to diffuse tensions and to keep open channels of mutually beneficial exchange.

Footnotes

  • Electronic supplementary material is available online at https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3904936.

  • Received July 11, 2017.
  • Accepted September 26, 2017.
  • © 2017 The Author(s)
http://royalsocietypublishing.org/licence

Published by the Royal Society. All rights reserved.

View Full Text

Sign in for Fellows of the Royal Society

Fellows: please access the online journals via the Fellows’ Room

Not a subscriber? Request a free trial

Log in using your username and password

Enter your Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences username.
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
Forgot your user name or password?

Log in through your institution

You may be able to gain access using your login credentials for your institution. Contact your library if you do not have a username and password.

Pay Per Article - You may access this article or this issue (from the computer you are currently using) for 30 days.

Regain Access - You can regain access to a recent Pay per Article or Pay per Issue purchase if your access period has not yet expired.

PreviousNext
Back to top
PreviousNext
25 October 2017
Volume 284, issue 1865
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences: 284 (1865)
  • Table of Contents
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Ed Board (PDF)

Keywords

cooperation
parochial altruism
threat
behavioural games
intergroup relations
Georgia
Share
Threat and parochialism in intergroup relations: lab-in-the-field evidence from rural Georgia
Max Schaub
Proc. R. Soc. B 2017 284 20171560; DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2017.1560. Published 25 October 2017
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Threat and parochialism in intergroup relations: lab-in-the-field evidence from rural Georgia
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences web site.
Print
Manage alerts

Please log in to add an alert for this article.

Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation tools
Research article:

Threat and parochialism in intergroup relations: lab-in-the-field evidence from rural Georgia

Max Schaub
Proc. R. Soc. B 2017 284 20171560; DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2017.1560. Published 25 October 2017

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Article reuse

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • 1. Introduction
    • 2. Material and methods
    • 3. Results
    • 4. Conclusion
    • Ethics
    • Data accessibility
    • Competing interests
    • Funding
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

See related subject areas:

  • evolution
  • behaviour

Related articles

Cited by

Large datasets are available through Proceedings B's partnership with Dryad

Open biology

  • PROCEEDINGS B
    • About this journal
    • Contact information
    • Purchasing information
    • Submit
    • Author benefits
    • Open access membership
    • Recommend to your library
    • FAQ
    • Help

Royal society publishing

  • ROYAL SOCIETY PUBLISHING
    • Our journals
    • Open access
    • Publishing policies
    • Conferences
    • Podcasts
    • News
    • Blog
    • Manage your account
    • Terms & conditions
    • Cookies

The royal society

  • THE ROYAL SOCIETY
    • About us
    • Contact us
    • Fellows
    • Events
    • Grants, schemes & awards
    • Topics & policy
    • Collections
    • Venue hire

Copyright © 2018 The Royal Society