nl en

Intergroup Relations


Entry requirements

Only open to master’s students in Psychology with specialisation Social and Organisational Psychology.


The objectives of this course are to gain in-depth knowledge of theories on intergroup relations, and to develop a critical look on these theories and research. To this end we will review state-of-the-art developments in theory and research on intergroup relations, stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. By reading ‘classic’ papers on these topics, as well as studying recent publications, students will gain advanced knowledge of a range of theoretical perspectives, including interdependence, social identity, self-categorization and socio-cognitive theories.

By means of review assignments, students will learn to develop a critical look on available scientific knowledge. By means of debate assignments, students will learn to look from different theoretical perspectives at a single problem, and will practice the oral presentation of their views. By means of policy recommendation assignments students will learn to apply theory on inter-group relations to practical problems, and to “pitch” their solution to the problem. The course is concluded with an exam.
This course will be offered twice during the academic year.

Course objectives

Upon completion of the course, students will have:

  • Learned about the diverse perspectives on intergroup relations;

  • Developed a critical look on theory and research;

  • Developed and “pitched” applications of theory on intergroup relations; and

  • Further practiced presentation- and writing skills.


For the timetables of your lectures, work groups and exams, please select your study programme in:
Psychology timetables



Students need to enroll for lectures and work group sessions.
Master’s course registration


Students are not automatically enrolled for an examination. They can register via uSis from 100 to 10 calendar days before the date. Students who are not registered will not be permitted to take the examination.
Registering for exams

Mode of instruction

5 seminars (attendance of meetings is obligatory).

Assessment method

The final grade is based on:

  • Rated oral presentations and written assignments (50%),

  • An exam (50%)

The Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences has instituted that instructors use a software programme for the systematic detection of plagiarism in students’ written work. In case of fraud disciplinary actions will be taken. Please see the information concerning fraud.

Reading list

The literature for this course will consist of a series of about 15 chapters and research articles (covering both the “classics” and more recent developments).

  • Sherif, M. (1956). Experiments in group conflict. Scientific American, 195, 54-58.

  • Sherif, M. (1958). Superordinate goals in the reduction of intergroup conflict. American Journal of Sociology, 63, 449-356.

  • Ellemers, N., & Haslam, S.A. (2012). Social identity theory. In: P. van Lange, A. Kruglanski, & T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 379-398). London: Sage.

  • Gaertner, S. L. , Mann, J., Murrell, A., & Dovidio, J. F. (1989). Reducing intergroup bias: The benefits of recategorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 239-249.

  • Stroebe, K., Lodewijkx, H. F. M., & Spears, R. (2005). Do unto others as they do unto you: Reciprocity and social identification as determinants of ingroup favouritism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 831-845.

  • Scheepers, D., Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2002). Integrating identity and instrumental approaches to intergroup discrimination: Different contexts, different motives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1455-1467.

  • Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., & Bachman, B. (1996). Revisiting the contact hypothesis: The induction of a common ingroup identity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20, 271-290.

  • Hornsey, M. J., & Hogg, M. A. (2000). Assimilation and diversity: An integrative model of subgroup relations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 143-156.

  • Wolsko, C., Park, B., Judd, C. M., & Wittenbrink, B. (2000). Framing interethnic ideology: Effects of multicultural and color-blind perspectives on judgments of groups and individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 635–654.

  • Verkuyten, M. (2010). Assimilation ideology and situational well-being among ethnic minority members. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 269-275.

  • Giessner, S. R., Viki, G. T., Otten, S., Terry, D. J. & Täuber, S. (2006). The challenge of merging: Merger patterns, pre-merger status and merger support. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 339-352.

  • Major, B., & Eliezer, D. (2010). Attributions to discrimination as a self-protective strategy: Evaluating the evidence. In C. Sedikides and M. Alicke (Eds.) Handbook of self-enhancement and self-protection (pp 320-337). New York: Guilford.

  • Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test-performance of African-Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797-811.

  • Kray, L. J., Thompson, L., & Galinsky, A. (2001). Battle of the sexes: Gender stereotype confirmation and reactance in negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 942-958.

  • Inzlicht, M., & Kang, S. K. (2010). Stereotype threat spillover: How coping with threats to social identity affects aggression, eating, decision-making, and attention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 467-481.

  • Word, C. O., Zanna, M. P., & Cooper, J., (1974). The nonverbal mediation of self-fulfilling prophecies in interracial interaction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 109–120.

  • Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5–18.

  • Lepore, L., & Brown R. (1997). Category and stereotype activation: Is prejudice inevitable? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 275-287.

  • Bargh, J. A. (1999). The cognitive monster: The case against controllability of automatic stereotype effects. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 361-382). New York: Guilford.

  • Mendoza, S. A., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Amodio, D. M. (2010). Reducing the expression of implicit stereotypes: Reflexive control through implementation intentions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 512-523.

  • Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (1996). Affirmative action, unintentional racial biases, and intergroup relations. Journal of Social Issues, 52, 51–75.

Contact information

Dr. Daan Scheepers