Mikhail Lyubansky, Ph.D.
Department of Psychology
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Neil Ashmon (student)
Tris Warkentin (student)
Angela Willoughby (student)

In this context, Eidelson and Eidelson (2003) have recently identified five belief domains-vulnerability, injustice, distrust, superiority, and helplessness-as meriting special attention because of their theoretical likelihood of propelling groups toward conflict. This five-fold framework offers promise for better understanding the psychology of group dynamics in conflict situations, but research advances will depend in part on reliable and valid measurement of these five constructs. The Individual-Group Belief Inventory (IGBI, Eidelson, 2003) was recently developed to address this need. Initial validity checks of this instrument indicate strong construct validity. For example, all five of the beliefs were significantly correlated (as expected, helplessness was negatively correlated) with support for military action in Afghanistan seven months after the terrorist attacks of 9-11-2001. Similarly, all five beliefs were significantly associated with concern over homeland security and an "us versus them" mentality (Eidelson, 2003). However, extensive research is needed to determine the validity of this instrument in other contexts and with other conflict groups.

The prison setting provides a unique opportunity to test the validity of the IGBI and to examine this five-factor model of group conflict. To begin with, conflict between inmates and corrections officers is well documented. For example, records show that in 1971 a four-day prison riot spurred by complaints of improper treatment at Attica Correctional Facility (New York) resulted in the deaths of ten corrections officers and over thirty inmates (Useem & Goldstone, 2002), while more recently, eight corrections officers at Corcoran Correctional Facility in California were brought up on charges that they violated the human rights of the inmates by forcing warring gangs to battle one another to the death in the yard (Lamotte, 2000). To be sure, the aforementioned cases are not typical, but they are indicative of an underlying conflict, and substantial social psychology research on roles and other contextual factors in prison settings has demonstrated the likelihood of negative, hostile, and dehumanizing encounters between corrections officers and prisoners (see Haney & Zimbardo, 1998). Moreover, the prison setting is ideal for an examination of conflict is that it is a uniquely closed system. Prison life is precisely regimented, and conditions are similar across many variables, including general quality of life variables, population composition, and authority structure between inmates and corrections officers. Thus, prisons provide an exemplary case of a well-controlled conflict situation, from which broad implications can be drawn to a variety of other populations, especially other prison settings.

Since inter-group conflict is a rather nebulous concept, for the purpose of this study we operationalize it as aggression toward the other group. The idea of aggression as the manifest reflection of conflict is well-discussed in the literature, and most conflict theorists agree that aggression, in all of its multivariate forms, is the result of inter-group or interpersonal conflict (Beck 1999; Sherif 1966; Alexander & Levin 1998, Bobo 2001).

The present validation study assesses the inmates' beliefs towards the corrections officers with respect to the five belief domains, and vice versa. We hypothesized that high levels of each of the five beliefs would be associated with greater levels of aggression between the groups. That is, after controlling for type of crime and time in prison, we predicted that the more inmates hold these beliefs about their in-group (i.e., inmates), the more likely they are to report aggressive attitudes and behaviors toward corrections officers. Similarly, the more corrections officers hold these beliefs about their group (i.e., other corrections officers), the more likely they are to report aggressive attitudes and behaviors toward the inmates.