You are here

Laiklik Bağlamında Yaş, Cinsiyet, Siyasi Görüş ve Dindarlık Seviyesine Göre Gruplararası İlişkide Belirleyici Olan Bazı Değişkenlerdeki Farklılaşmalar

Differentiations on Some Determinant Variables of Intergroup Relations According to Age, Sex, Political View and Religiosity in Context of Laicism

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

Abstract (2. Language): 
The aim of this study is to investigate the intergroup relations in the context of Laicity which is a controversial issue nowadays in Turkey. Resulst of the data gathered from totally 625 university students showed a positive relationship between age and Contact and a negative relationship between age and In-Group Identity. Women had higher scores then men from In-Group Identity and Perceived Threat; men were higher on In-Group Pressure, Contact and Overall Evaluation of the Out-Group. Kemalists showed more In-Group Identity than the other political groups, perceived more Threat, and evaluated the out-group less positive. Democrats had significantly higher Contact scores whereas Islamists perceived more Discrimination than the other groups. The level of the religiosity was found to be positively related with Contact, Perceived Discrimination, Openness to Intergroup Communication and Overall Evaluation of the Out-Group and negatively related with Perceived Threat.
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışmada gruplar arası ilişkileri günümüz Türkiye’sinde oldukça tartışmalı bir konu olan laiklik bağlamında incelemek amaçlanmıştır. Toplam 625 üniversite öğrencisine yapılan uygulamalar sonucunda, yaş ile Temas arasında pozitif, İç-Grup Kimliği ile negatif yönde ilişki bulunmuştur. Kadınlar İç-Grup Kimliği ve Algılanan Tehdit’te erkeklere nazaran daha yüksek çıkarken erkekler İç-Grup Baskısı, Temas, Dış-Grubun Genel Değerlendirmesi puanlarında daha yüksek puanlar almışlardır. Kendini Kemalist olarak tanımlayanlar, diğer gruplardan anlamlı derecede daha yüksek grup içi bağlılık göstermişler, daha fazla tehdit algılamışlar ve dış grubu daha az olumlu değerlendirmişlerdir. Demokratlar anlamlı derecede daha yüksek Temas puanı alırken, İslamcılar, daha yüksek Ayrımcılık algılamışlardır. Dindarlık seviyesinin, Temas, Algılanan Ayrımcılık, Gruplararası İletişime Açık Olma ve Dış-Grubun Genel Değerlendirmesi ile pozitif yönde; Algılanan Tehdit ile negatif yönde anlamlı ilişki içinde olduğu gözlenmiştir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
49-70

REFERENCES

References: 

Akbaş, G. (2010). Social Identity and Intergroup
Relations: The case of Alevis and
Sunnis in Amasya. Middle East Technical
University, Ankara: Yayınlanmamış
Doktora Tezi.
Baysu, G. (2007). The Effects of Intergroup
Perceptions and In-group Identifications
on the Political Participation of the Second-
Generation Turkish Migrants in the
Netherlands. Middle East Technical University,
Ankara: Yayınlanmamış Doktora
Tezi.
Brewer, M. B. (1999). The psychology of
prejudice: In-group love or out-group
hate? Journal of Social Issues, 55(3),
429–444.
Brown, R., Eller, A., Leeds, S., & Stace,
K. (2007). Intergroup contact and intergroup
attitudes: A longitudinal study.
European Journal of Social Psychology,
37, 692–703.
Cingöz Ulu, B. (2008). Structure of Turkish
national identity and attitudes towards
ethno-cultural groups in Turkey. Unpublished
PhD Dissertation, York University,
Toronto.
Cuhadar, E. & Dayton, B. (2011). The social
psychology of identity and intergroup
conflict: From theory to practice.
International Studies Perspective, 12,
273-293.
Does, S., Derks, B., & Ellemers, N. (2011).
Thou shalt not discriminate: How emphasizing
moral ideals rather than obligations
increases Whites’ support for social
equality.Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 47, 562–571.
Dursun, Ç. (2006). The struggle goes on:
The discursive strategies of the Islamist
press in Turkey. Journal of Contemporary
European Studies, 14(2),
161–182.
Falomir-Pichastor, J.M., Gabarot, F. &
Mugny, G. (2009). Group motives in
threatening contexts: When a loyalty
conflict paradoxically reduces the influence
of an anti-discrimination ingroup
norm. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 39, 196–206.
Falomir-Pichastor, J. M., Oz-Rojas, D. M.,
Invernizzi, F. & Mugny, G. (2004). Perceived
in-group threat as a factor moderating
the influence of in-group norms
on discrimination against foreigners.
European Journal of Social Psychology,
34, 135–153.
Greer, J.E. (1985). Viewing “the other side”
in Northern Ireland: Openness and attitudes
to religion among Catholic and
Protestant adolescents. Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion, 24(3), 275-
292.
Hall, N.R., Crisp, R.J., & Suen, M. (2009).
Reducing implicit prejudice by blurring
intergroup boundaries. Basic and Applied
Social Psychology, 31, 244-254.
Hall, D.L., Matz, D.C., and Wood, W. (2010).
Why don’t we practice what we preach?
A meta-analytic review of religious racism.
Personality and Social Psychology
Review, 14(1), 126–139.
Hewstone, M. (2009). Living apart, living
Cesur, Paker / Psikoloji Çalışmaları Dergisi 32-2 (2012) 49-70 69
together? The role of intergroup contact
in social integration. “Max Planck
Institute for the Study of Religious and
Ethnic Diversity” Working Paper 09-12.
Huddy, L. (2001). From social to political
identity: A critical examination of Social
Identity Theory. Political Psychology,
22(1), 127-156.
Hunsberger, B. & Jackson, L.M. (2005). Religion,
meaning, and prejudice. Journal
of Social Issues, 61(4), 807-826.
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, 700-710.
LeVine, R. A., & Campbell, D. T. (1972).
Ethnocentrism: Theories of Conflict,
Ethnic Attitudes and Group Behavior.
New York: Wiley.
Livingstone, A., & Haslam, S.A. (2008).
The importance of social identity content
in a setting of chronic social conflict:
Understanding intergroup relations in
Northern Ireland. British Journal of Social
Psychology, 47, 1–21.
Luhtanen, R. & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective
self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation
of one’s social identity. Personality and
Social Psychology bulletin, 18, 302-318.
Newcomb, T. (1965). Attitude development
as a function of reference groups: The
Bennington study. In H. Proshansky, &
B. Seidenberg (Eds), Basic Studies in
Social Psychology (pp. 215 230). New
York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Paker, K. O. (2005). Günlük Düşüncede
Modernlik, Din ve Laiklik. Ankara: Vadi
Yay.
Riek, B.M., Mania, E.W., & Gaertner, S.L.
(2006). Intergroup threat and outgroup
attitudes: A meta-analytic review. Personality
and Social Psychology Review,
10(4), 336-353.
Ruggiero, K. M., & Taylor, D. M. (1995).
Coping with discrimination: How minority
group members perceive the discrimination
that confronts them. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology,
68, 826-838.
Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1953). Groups
in harmony and tension: An integration
of studies on intergroup relations. New
York: Harper.
Smurda, J.D., Wittig, M.A. & Gokalp, G.
(2006). Effects of threat to a valued social
identity on implicit self-esteem and
discrimination. Group Processes Intergroup
Relations, 9, 181-197.
Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, W. C. (1996).
Intergroup Relations. Boulder, CO:
Westview Press.
Stephan, W. G. & Stephan, C. W. (1996a).
Predicting prejudice. International Journal
of Intercultural Relations, 20,
409-426.
Stephan, W. G & Stephan, C. W. (2000).
An integrated theory of prejudice. In S.
Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing Prejudice and
Discrimination: The Claremont Symposium
on Applied Social Psychology (pp.
23-45). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation Between
Social Groups: Studies in the Social
Psychology of Intergroup Relations.
London: Academic Press.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative
theory of intergroup conflict.
In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.),
The Social Psychology of Intergroup
Relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
Turam, B. (2008). Secularist activism versus
pious non-resistance. International
Feminist Journal of Politics, 10(4),
475–494.
70 Cesur, Paker / Psikoloji Çalışmaları Dergisi 32-2 (2012) 49-70
van der Noll, J., Poppe, E. and Verkuyten, M.
(2010). Political tolerance and prejudice:
differential reactions toward Muslims
in the Netherlands. Basic and Applied
Social Psychology, 32,46–56.
van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology. A multidisciplinary
approach. Sage: London.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com