Scapegoating theories differ on frustration’s source but share an irrational-displacement core

Evidence

In sum, the major difference between the psychodynamic and frustration– aggression theories of scapegoating is whether frustration is due to internal psychodynamic conflict or to external sources that block goal-directed behavior. Otherwise, both views suggest that: (a) aggression against the true source of frustration is inhibited, (b) aggression is displaced toward others who are weak and therefore unable to retaliate, and (c) negative stereotypes of scapegoated groups are mere projections or rationalizations that obscure the real reasons for hostility toward them. Overall, both accounts view scapegoating as irrational – an infantile, maladaptive, and emotionally driven response to (either internal or external) frustration. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1569

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clean synthesis of the two rival scapegoat mechanisms into their shared three-part structure and shared assumption of irrationality.
• XREF: connects to: Scapegoating requires large shared frustrations plus a blaming ideology. — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 794