prejudice

• prejudice


  make assumptions before getting the chance to try/evaluate something
• stereotypes and prejudice


  stereotypes are a result of social heuristics, and they provide 'shortcuts' which enable us to quickly categorise groups - Prejudice is the affective element of this process which is a motivated cognitive style (Allport, 1954)

  
  

  stereotype that women are warm and nurturing, whilst men are competence means that women face prejudice in areas which rely on competence
• social groups

  - ingroup is a group you belong to

  - outgroup is a group you do not belong to
• intergroup bias


  preference for an ingroup over an outgroup
• outgroup bias (prejudice)


  negative attitude towards the members of specific social outgroups, discrimination is the behavioural output of the prejudice
• ABC model


  affective = prejudice

  behavioural = discrimination

  cognitive = stereotypes
• social identity theory


  (Tajfel and Turner, 1979)individual strive to achieve or maintain positive social identity > positive social identity partly based on favourable comparisons with relevant out-groups > ingroup must be perceived as positively different or distinct from the relevant outgroups > we are motivated to maximise the positive difference between ingroup and outgroup

  
  

  - aonce perceived positive ingroup may start to be perceived negatively

  - can be part of many ingroups; some of greater value to us than others
• Self Categorisation Theory

  (Turner et al., 1987)

  people self-categorise into social identity categories, and these categorise differ in 'relative accessibility' (eg. snowboarders and skiers)
• intersectionality


  term derived from Black feminist thought that started as a legal term and is now used often in psychology to draw attention to the way that women and those from an oppressed minority are often discriminated against more toughly because of the 'double disadvantage' - our social identities intersect
• infrahumanization


  the view that groups are fundamentally different

  - we make positive distinctiveness (Turner et al. 1987): "my ingroup is great, my outgroup is bad"
• dehumanisation


  the most extreme form of infrahumanization

  - Paladino et al. (2002) found that ingroup names are more strongly associated with uniquely human emotions than outgroup names
• objectification


  the action of degrading someone to the status of a mere object

  - people are seen as a 'sum of parts' rather than full humans

  - dehumanisation is linked to objectification which disrupts women's likelihood of protesting sexism
• factors affecting likelihood to endorse or protest prejudice

  - education

  - history

  - personality

  - need for closure
• education

  links to awareness and knowledge of other groups - has the power to pull together collective views
• history


  strong prejudice was awarded in the past
• authoritarian personality


  Adorno proposed this as an explanation for obedience (1950)

  - belief in absolute obedience or submission to authority figures, leading to the oppression of subordinates (more prone to obedience and conformity)

  - promotes by strict parent-child relationships in childhood

  - measured by the F-scale ('fascist')
• need for closure


  The desire to come to a decision that will resolve ambiguity and conclude an issue

  
  

  need for closure (basic determinant) > essentialist thinking: "authoritarian" ideology (intermediate processes) > prejudice (outcome)

  - Roets and Van Hiel (2011)
• realist group conflict theory (Sherif, 1996)

  prejudice is situational and intergroup conflict develops due to competition for scarce resources (including power and prestige)

  - LeVine and Campbell ( 1973)

  
  

  conflict is fuelled by prejudice and is an adaptive response to lack of resources

  - competing for resources is a problem for any developing species
• robber's cave studies


  - boy's summer camp USA

  - split into two groups: 'rattlers' and 'eagles'

  - 3 stages: group formation, intergroup competition, conflict reduction

  
  

  - threat can include resources such as in-group's safety, economy, well-being, or politics (Tajfel and Turner, 1986)

  - competition can lead to intergroup conflict however, it is not necessary or sufficient for intergroup bias to occur
• minimal group paradigm (Tajfel)

  humans have a need for validation

  
  

  - ppts allocated to two groups based on which painting they prefer

  - identities of other group members unknown

  - ppts asked to allocate points (money) to a series of unknown ingroup members and outgroup members

  - no individual gain to ppts
• findings of Tajfel's study

  ppts tend to allocate more points to their own ingroup: tendency to maximise differences between groups even if that means awarding fewer points to ingroup members

  
  

  dissociating similarity (liking painting) from pure group membership (categorization by coin-toss): the explicit grouping of people, even on an arbitrary basis, is sufficient for discriminatory responses to occur
• reducing prejudice


  can be achieved through increasing intergroup contact, and mere exposure to outgroup members
• intergroup contact


  bringing together members of different groups should reduce prejudice (Allport, 1954)

  - co-operation, common goals, equal status, institutional support

  however, forcing people of different social groups together does not reduce strong negative attitudes
• extended contact (Wright et al., 1997)

  based on Robbers Cave experiments: one person from each different group worked together and then discussed their experience with other ingroup members

  - intergroup bias was significantly higher in the intergroup competition stage

  
  

  based on minimal group paradigm: watched on group member working with a member of the other group - three conditions: hostile, neutral, friend

  - mean rating of conditions similar for ingroup

  - mean rating for hostile lowest, and friend highest in outgroup
• mere exposure


  just knowing ingroup members who have outgroup friends can reduce outgroup prejudice and lead to a greater liking of outgroup members

  
  

  +ve ingroup exemplar: social norms, reduce anxiety

  +ve outgroup exemplar reduces stereotypes
• limitations of prejudice interventions

  - dependence on positive norms: extended contact relies on observing positive intergroup relationships among in-group members

  - if negative relationships or hostility are observed, this could reinforce or worsen prejudice

  - effectiveness depends on identification with in-group members who have outgroup friends

  - possible superficial attitude change

  - potential consequences for how we perceive ourselves