Which statement best describes the effect of resource scarcity on intergroup dynamics, according to conflict theory?

Which statement best describes the effect of resource scarcity on intergroup dynamics, according to conflict theory?

• A. Scarcity leads to increased competition and conflict
• B. Scarcity leads to greater cooperation and harmony
• C. Scarcity has no effect on interactions
• D. Scarcity reduces group boundaries

Answer: (A)

In conflict theory, resources and power are tightly linked, and groups compete for what is scarce. When resources like jobs, money, or access to services are limited, groups tend to see each other as rivals rather than partners. This sharpens competition over those goods, heightens tensions, and often leads to hostility, prejudice, and efforts to maintain or expand dominance. The statement that scarcity leads to increased competition and conflict captures this core pattern, because it directly describes how limited resources push groups into adversarial relations as they vie for control. Other possibilities imply outcomes that conflict theory does not predict. Cooperation and harmony are more typical of theories that emphasize shared interests or positive intergroup contact, which conflicts with the idea that scarcity drives rivalry. Saying scarcity has no effect ignores the power dynamics at the heart of conflict theory, and suggesting that scarcity reduces group boundaries runs counter to the way competition over limited resources typically strengthens in-group versus out-group divisions.

In conflict theory, resources and power are tightly linked, and groups compete for what is scarce. When resources like jobs, money, or access to services are limited, groups tend to see each other as rivals rather than partners. This sharpens competition over those goods, heightens tensions, and often leads to hostility, prejudice, and efforts to maintain or expand dominance. The statement that scarcity leads to increased competition and conflict captures this core pattern, because it directly describes how limited resources push groups into adversarial relations as they vie for control.

Other possibilities imply outcomes that conflict theory does not predict. Cooperation and harmony are more typical of theories that emphasize shared interests or positive intergroup contact, which conflicts with the idea that scarcity drives rivalry. Saying scarcity has no effect ignores the power dynamics at the heart of conflict theory, and suggesting that scarcity reduces group boundaries runs counter to the way competition over limited resources typically strengthens in-group versus out-group divisions.