Two student organizations at Pitt are bitter rivals. They are often passive aggressive or actively hostile towards one another. Which of the following is the best way to reduce this animosity?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Consider the scenario where two rival student organizations at Pitt are frequently hostile or passive-aggressive toward each other. The goal is to reduce animosity and foster cooperation rather than punishment or separation.
Option 1: Have the groups jointly fundraise for Pitt's Day of Giving with a shared goal of $10,000. This approach creates a concrete, shared objective that requires collaboration, negotiation, and mutual reliance. By working toward a common good for the campus, members must communicate effectively, share responsibilities, and see the other group as a partner rather than an adversary. Such collaborative tasks can build positive intergroup contact and reduce hostility over time.
Option 2: Punish acts of hostility by banning the organizations. While discipline might deter overt aggression in the short term, it does not address underlying causes of conflict (competition, stereotypes, lack of trust). Banning can entrench grievances, reduce opportunities for constructive interaction, and may foster cynicism or fear rather than reconciliation. It’s a punitive measure rather than a problem-solving one.
Option 3: Have the groups engage in a competitive sport. Although shared activities can promote bonding, competition between rival groups may exacerbate competition and rivalry if not carefully framed. If the sport becomes a battleground for pride, it could intensify tensions rather than reduce them unless there are structured rules that emphasize teamwork and neutral framing. This option risks turning cooperation into another arena for rivalry.
Option 4: Make sure they never interact. Isolation eliminates opportunities for dialogue, understanding, and relationship-building. Without contact, miscommunications and stereotypes are likely to persist or worsen. This approach directly contradicts the goal of reducing animosity and can lead to a frozen conflict rather than resolution.
In sum, option 1 directly targets collaborative engagement and shared purpose, which are well-supported strategies for reducing intergroup hostility, whereas the other options rely on avoidance, punishment, or competition in contexts that can sustain or worsen tension. The most constructive path appears to be the cooperative fundraising task, given its potential to foster communication, trust, and a sense of mutual achievement.

2261 PSY 0105 SEC1000 Final Exam- Requires Respondus LockDown Browser

Two student organizations at Pitt are bitter rivals. They are often passive aggressive or actively hostile towards one another. Which of the following is the best way to reduce this animosity?

查看解析

登录即可查看完整答案

类似问题

During the podcast, what reason do they offer for why people sometimes “burn bridges” prematurely in conflict?

According to the conversation, which practices help build trust in difficult conversations? [Select all that apply]

What is one tactic or phrasing that could be useful to try to move a conversation away from a debate and into a dialogue?

During a conflict, Leo tries to meet his needs without any concern for what Fatima needs. Which conflict resolution style is Leo using?

Four couples are arguing over who in the couple should do more housework. According to the research described in your text, which couple is responding to conflict in the healthiest way?

Four couples are arguing over who in the couple should do more housework. According to the research described in your text, which couple is responding to conflict in the healthiest way?

One individual abusing another is an example of what approach to conflict?

The strategy of challenging nagging, whining, complaining, anger and arguments may be appropriate for which conflict spiral phase?

更多留学生实用工具

考试浏览器助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单