The Realistic Group Conflict Theory

The realistic group conflict theory proposes that whenever there are two or more groups seeking the same limited resources, there will be an escalation towards conflict (Sherif, Harvey, White, Hood, & Sherif, 1961). This conflict can be in various forms including negative stereotypes, negative beliefs, and discrimination between the groups. The groups will form their own interpretations of “ingroups” and “outgroups.” The interpretations then become fuel for competitive action over any limited resources. This action is motivated by their thoughts, which they also deem as “rational” (Houghton, 170). This was tested by Muzafer Sherif with subjects being randomly assigned to groups, and all the participants were without psychological abnormalities. As ethnicity did not have a direct role in his experiment, it is possible to draw from his results, if only with a certain degree of confidence in its relation to national groups.
This theory is grounded on the premise that groups will conflict if they must compete

This was also studied in conjunction with the realistic group conflict theory, and now poses some opposite claims to the position above. If the groups are able to identify a goal in which they cannot succeed without the other, the desire to work against one another greatly reduces[Cite]. It now becomes more beneficial to cooperate for mutual success, rather than for individual gain. Assuming (if not hoping) that both groups are able to agree on goals that benefit both parties, it would seem the groups would then be able put aside their differences to work towards a gratifying