Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
The study investigates whether social integration between specific ethnic groups can be undermined. The selected group included white and Latinos living in the United States, Ashkenazim and Mizrachim, and Jews and Arabs in Israel. The social status of each group was considered according to the neighborhood rating in community. For instance, Latinos, Mizrachim, and Arabs are considered low social status groups. Social class is determined by reviewing education, income, and employment details. Due to their striking differences in a number of important aspects, these particular intergroup scenarios were selected for the study. Jews and Arabs in Israel have fought each other in the past. Arabs who lived inside Israel’s borders after the Six-Day War in 1967 were awarded Israeli citizenship. Still, those who lived beyond the so-called “Green Line” were neglected and denied the right to become citizens (Levin & Sidanius, 1999). Jews were granted citizenship without any conditions per the Israeli law of return, which shows the differences between the two groups.
Data collection involved four different samples of students from universities. One sample was from the United States, two from Jews, and one from Arabs. The American sample involved 294 understand students, 133 Latinos, and 161 whites (Levin & Sidanius, 1999). Data from the Arab sample was gathered directly from different classrooms after permission was granted by relevant university authorities. The Arab sample consisted of Moslems, Christians, and other students who failed to indicate their religion. Results suggested that better ingroup identification was related to heightened positive ingroup affect for all high and low social status categories. In addition, high SDO was positively linked to ingroup identification for high-status groups, while it was negatively influenced by ingroup identification for low-status groups.
The research examines whether ethnic diversity could weaken group cohesiveness. It builds a universal model in which several routes account for the potential for diversity, relative group size, and spatial segregation to erode various measures of social cohesiveness. According to the study’s hypotheses, people exposed to a high linguistic and cultural variety within their social circles experience a greater likelihood of feeling alone. Furthermore, emotions of isolation and aimlessness are exacerbated by barriers to communication and a lack of familiarity with accepted social practices.
The study involved a review of 99 articles restricted only to those written in the English Language. Old versions of some articles were eliminated to ensure up-to-date data was used. The researchers used the findings of these studies to determine which indicators of social cohesiveness and heterogeneity were examined and at what geographical level. There are three types of findings: confirm, contradict, and equivocate. All indices of ethnic heterogeneity in all researched places are significantly and negatively related to all scrutinized markers of social cohesiveness, lending credence to the idea that heterogeneity impairs social cohesion. Instead, the key claim is rejected. The study is classified as a rejection when no consistent negative relationship exists between ethnic heterogeneity and any of the indices of social cohesiveness studied. When there is no clear conclusion drawn from a study, or when those conclusions alter depending on the measure of social cohesiveness or ethnic diversity used or depending on the location of the study, we call that a mixed study. Finally, when results from the same study change depending on the demographic characteristics of the participants, the results are said to be mixed.
The results indicate consistent evidence that backs the enclosed assertion for neighborhood-specific features of social cohesion. In addition, the constrict claim was more supported in the United States than in other regions, which may be due to fear that the culture of the whites will be eroded (Meer & Tolsma, 2014). However, some studies reviewed showed no correlation between racial and ethnic variety and decreased social integration.
References
Levin, S., & Sidanius, J. (1999). Social dominance and social identity in the United States and Israel: Ingroup favoritism or outgroup derogation?Political Psychology, 20(1), 99-126. Web.
Meer, T. V. D., & Tolsma, J. (2014). Ethnic diversity and its effects on social cohesion. Annual Review of Sociology, 40, 459-478. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.