Gruplararası Temas: Farklı Sosyal Kimliklere Sahip Üniversite Öğrencilerinin, Aynı Yurt Odasında Yaşadıkları Gruplararası Temasın İncelenmesi

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, yurtlarda aynı odada kalan farklı sosyal kimliğesahip üniversite öğrencileri arasında
yaşanan gruplararası temasın sıklığını ve niteliğini derinlemesine incelemektir. Araştırma nitel araştırma
yaklaşımlarından fenomenolojik çalışma olarak kurgulanmıştır. Çalışmada nitel veriler aynı yurt odasını paylaşan ve kendilerini etnik ve kültürel alt kimlik olarak Türk (22) ve Kürt (23) olarak tanımlayan toplam 45 öğrenci ile yüz
yüze derinlemesine görüşülerek toplanmıştır. Araştırmada yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme tekniği kullanılmıştır.
Verilerin analizinde içerik analizi ve tematik analiz birlikte kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın sonucunda, aynı odayı
paylaşan farklı sosyal kimliğe sahip öğrencilerin yurt binasında sohbet etme, birlikte yemek yeme, akademik ve
sportif aktiviteler ve film seyretme gibi faaliyetlerde bulundukları, yurt binası dışında ise kültürel etkinliklere
katılma, kafelerde oturma, yemek yeme, akademik ve sportif aktiviteler, gezme ve alışveriş yapma gibi faaliyetlerde bulundukları saptanmıştır. Öğrencilerin sosyal kimlik farkı söz konusu olmaksızın etkileşimlerini gönüllü ve içten gerçekleştirdikleri ve etnik kimlikler yerine, kişilik özelliklerini daha çok öne çıkardıkları bulunmuştur. Hem Türk hem de Kürt öğrencilerin büyük çoğunluğunun kendilerini kabul edilmiş hissettikleri saptanmıştır. Gruplararası dışlama çok az öğrenci tarafından vurgulanmıştır. Hem Türk hem de Kürt öğrenciler, diğer gruba ait kişilerle ilişkilerinde samimiyet olsa bile, yine de kendi sosyal kimliklerinden gelen iç-grup üyesi kişilerle daha özel bir samimiyet yaşadıklarını belirtmişlerdir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Gruplar arası temas,gruplar arası arkadaşlık,gruplar arası ilişkiler,sosyal kimlik

Intergroup Contact: An Investigation of Intergroup Contact between Students with Different Social Identities Living in The Same Dormitory Room

Abstract

The aim of this research is to provide an in-depth examination of the frequency and quality of intergroup
contact among university students with different social identity categories who live in the same dormitory room. The research was designed as a qualitative study utilizing phenomenological approach. A total of 45 students, who identified themselves as Turkish (22) and Kurdish (23), were interviewed and qualitative data were collected through semi-structured interview technique. In the analysis of qualitative data, both content and thematic analyses were performed. The results of the study indicated that the students interacted every day. Majority of the common activities students engaged in at the dormitory included chatting, eating together, academic and sports activities and watching movies; and outside the dormitory building included participating in cultural activities, sitting in cafés, eating out, academic and sports activities, hanging out and shopping. It was determined that the students interacted voluntarily and sincerely, regardless of the difference in social identity. When joint activities were carried out, personality traits were found to be more prominent than ethnic identities. The majority of students from either social identity were found to feel accepted by the other group. Even though the students with either social identity are sincere in their relations with the other group members, they still have a more specific and intense quality of sincerity with the inner group members from their own social identities.

Keywords

• Intergroup contact,cross group friendship,intergroup relationships,social identity

Kaynakça

1. Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
2. Barlow, F. K., Louis, W. R., & Hewstone, M. (2009). Rejected! Cognitions of rejection and intergroup anxiety as mediators of the impact of cross-group friendships on prejudice. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 389-405. doi:10.1348/014466608X387089.
3. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2007). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101.
4. Chen, X., & Graham, S. (2015). Cross-ethnic friendships and intergroup attitudes among Asian American adolescents. Child Development, 86 (3), 749-764.
5. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri: Beş yaklaşıma göre niteli araştırma ve araştırma deseni. M. Bütün ve S. B. Demir, (Çev.Edt.). Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi. (Orijinal çalışma basım tarihi, 2013).
6. Davies, C, Tropp, L. R., Aron, A., Pettigrew, T. F., & Wright, S. C. (2011). Cross-group friendships and intergroup attitudes: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 75, 332- 351.
7. Davies, K., Wright, C. S., Aron, A., & Comeau, J. (2013). Intergroup contact through friendship: Intimacy and norms. In G. Hodson & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Advances in intergroup contact (pp. 200-229). East Sussex: Psychology Press.
8. Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Validzic, A., Matoka, K., Johnson, B., & Frazier, S. (1997). Extending the benefits of recategorization: Evaluations self-disclosure, and helping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 401-420.

9. Dovidio, J., Gaertner, S. L., & Saguy, T. (2007). Another view of “we”: Majority and minority group perspectives on a common ingroup identity. European Review of Social Psychology, 18 (1), 296– 330.
10. Florack, A., Rohmannb, A., Palcua, J., & Mazziottab, A. (2014). How initial cross-group friendships prepare for intercultural communication: The importance of anxiety reduction and self-confidence in communication. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 43, 278-288
11. Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., & Bachman, B. A. (1996). Revisiting the contact hypothesis: The induction of a common ingroup identity. Journal of Intercultural Relations. 20 (3/4), 271-290.
12. Gaertner, S., L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2005). Understanding and addressing contemporary racism: from aversive racism to the common ingroup identity model. Journal of Social Issues, 61 (3), 615-639.
13. Hewstone, M. (2009). Living apart, living together? The role of intergroup contact in social integration. Proceedings of the British Academy, 162, 243-300.
14. Mazziotta, A., Rohmann, A., Wrightt C. S., Tezanos-Pintoi, D. P., & Lutterbach, S. (2015). (How) does positive and negative extended cross-group contact predict direct cross-group contact and intergroup attitudes? European Journal of Social Psychology 45, 653-667.
15. Miles, M, B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16. Paolini, S., Hewstone, M., Cairns, E., & Voci, A. (2004). Effects of direct and indirect cross-group friendships on judgments of Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland: The mediating role of an anxiety-reduction mechanism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 770-786.
17. Patton, Q. M. (2014). Nitel araştırma ve değerlendirme yöntemleri. M. Bütün ve S., B., Demir, (Çev. Edt.).
18. Ankara Pegem Akademi. (Orjinal çalışma basım tarihi, 2002).
19. Pettigrew, T. F. (2010). Commentary: South African contributions to the study of intergroup relations. Journal of Social Issues, 66 (2), 417-430.
20. Pettigrew, T. F. (1997). Generalized intergroup contact effects on prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 173-185. doi:10.1177/0146167297232006
21. Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 65-85.
22. Pettigrew, T. F. (2008). Future directions for intergroup contact theory and research. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 187-199.
23. Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, R. L. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90 (5), 751-783. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751.
24. Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, R. L. (2008). How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 922-934. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.504
25. Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2011). When groups meet: The dynamics of intergroup contact. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
26. Pettigrew, T. F., Tropp, R. L., Wagner, U., & Christ, O. (2011). Recent advances in intergroup contact theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35, 271-280
27. Stringer, M., Irwing, P., Giles, M., McClenahan, C., Wilson, R., & Hunter, A. J. (2009). Intergroup contact, friendship quality and political attitudes in integrated and segregated schools in Northern Ireland. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 239-257.
28. Titzmann, F. P., & Brenick, A., (2015). Friendships fighting prejudice: A longitudinal perspective on adolescents’ cross-group friendships with immigrants. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 44, 1318- 1331. doi: 10.1007/s10964-015-0256-6.
29. Tropp, R. L., & Pettigrew, F. T. (2005). Differential relationships between intergroup contact and affective and cognitive dimensions of prejudice. PSPB, 31 (8), 1145-1158. doi: 10.1177/0146167205274854
30. Turner, N., R. & Cameron, L. (2016). Confidence in contact: A new perspective on promoting cross-group friendship among children and adolescents. Social Issues and Policy Review, 10 (1), 212-246.
31. Turner, R. N., Hewstone, M., Voci, A., Paolini, S., & Christ, O. (2007). Reducing prejudice via direct and extended cross-group friendship. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 212-255.
32. West, T. V., Pearson, A. R., Dovidio, J. F., Shelton, J. N., & Trail, T. E. (2009). Superordinate identity and intergroup roommate friendship development. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1266-1272. doi:10.1016/ j.jesp.2009.08.002.
33. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi.