PrejudiceChapter 13

PrejudicePrejudice is ubiquitous.

◦It affects us all.Prejudice often flows from the minority group to the majority group. ◦Can also flow in the other direction

Any group can be a target of prejudice

Who can be the victim of prejudice?

Many aspects of your identity can cause you to be labeled and discriminated against:◦ Nationality◦ Racial and ethnic identity◦ Gender◦ Sexual orientation◦ Religion◦ Appearance◦ Physical state◦ Weight◦ Disabilities◦ Diseases◦ Hair color◦ Professions◦ Hobbies

What is Prejudice?Prejudice

◦General attitude structure and its affective (emotional) component

Social psychologists use the word prejudice primarily when referring to negative attitudes about others. ◦But we have have positive attitudes too.

Components of a Prejudiced Attitude

◦ Affective (emotional) component Type of emotion linked with the attitude (e.g., anger, warmth)

Extremity of the attitude (e.g., mild uneasiness, outright hostility)

◦ Behavioral component How people act on emotions and cognitions

◦ Cognitive component Beliefs or thoughts that make up the attitude

Stereotype

Stereotype (people prototype)Cognitive Shortcut (Representativeness Heuristic)◦ A generalization about a group of people in which identical characteristics are assigned to virtually all members of the group, regardless of actual variation among the members.

Once formed, stereotypes are resistant to change on the basis of new information!

Stereotyping

Stereotyping is a cognitive process, not an emotional one. ◦ Stereotyping does not necessarily lead to intentional acts of abuse.

◦ Stereotyping is a technique we use to simplify how we look at the world. We all do it to some extent.

Potential abuse of stereotyping can be more subtle—and might involve a stereotype about a positive attribute.◦ Example—race and sports ability

Denies Individuality

Denies individuality of person ◦ Ignore the fact that plenty of African American kids are not adept at basketball and a plenty of white kids are

If we meet a young African American man and feel astonished at his ineptitude on the basketball court, we are denying him his individuality

Gender Stereotypes Traditional Stereotypes

◦ Women More socially sensitive, friendlier, and more concerned with the welfare of others

◦ Men More dominant, controlling, and independent

Hostile sexism◦ Stereotypical views of women that suggest that women are inferior to men E.g., that they are less intelligent, less competent, and so on

Benevolent sexism◦ Stereotypical, positive views of women

MicroaggressionsMicroaggressions

◦ Slights, indignities and “putdowns” directed at minorities and people with disabilities

Is this going too far?People hide prejudice.

◦ When situation becomes “safe,” their prejudice will be revealed. Example

Questioning President Obama’s Americanism, not his race per se

Implicit Prejudice Is there implicit prejudice?

Can you tell it b observing behavior?

Implicit Prejudice

Automatic processing of information◦ Do not have control over

Stereotypes may be automatically triggered under certain conditions.

Controlled processing of information◦ Have control over

Ignore or refute stereotype that was automatically activated

Cultural Prejudice◦ If a society believes that a particular group is stupid, uneducable, it will act in accordance with beliefs. Educational resources will not be provided to that group.

The Consequence—The group will not attain adequate education.

The Result—The society’s original belief will be confirmed.

Positive Stereotyping

Potential abuse of stereotyping can be more subtle—and might involve a stereotype about a positive attribute.◦ Example—race and sports ability

Denies individuality of person ◦ Ignore the fact that plenty of African American kids are not adept at basketball and a plenty of white kids are

Institutionalized Prejudice◦ If a society believes that a particular group is stupid, uneducable, it will act in accordance with beliefs. Educational resources will not be provided to that group.

The Consequence—The group will not attain adequate education.

The Result—The society’s original belief will be confirmed.

Institutional Discrimination

Institutional discrimination◦ Practices that discriminate, legally or illegally, against a minority group by virtue of its ethnicity, gender, culture, age, sexual orientation, or other target of societal or company prejudice.

Normative Conformity

Normative conformity◦ The strong tendency to go along with the group in order to fulfill the group’s expectations and gain acceptance

Institutional Prejudice

Institutionalized racism◦ Racist attitudes that are held by the vast majority of people living in a society where stereotypes and discrimination are the norm

Institutionalized sexism◦ Sexist attitudes that are held by the vast majority of people living in a society where stereotypes and discrimination are the norm

Stereotype ThreatVictim of prejudice may internalize stereotypes

Experience anxiety about confirming stereotype

The apprehension experienced by members of a group that their behavior might confirm a cultural stereotype

Stereotype Threat (Stone et al., 1999)

Participants played a game of miniature golf. ◦ One half were told the game measured “sport strategic intelligence.” Black athletes performed worse than white athletes.

◦ One half were told the game measured “natural athletic ability.” Black athletes better than white athletes.

Stereotype—Men are better at math than women.◦ IV = Information given to women about a math test◦ DV = women’s performance on the test◦ When told the math test was designed to show gender differences in math abilities women did not perform as well as men

◦ When told the math test did not detect male-female differences, women and men performed equally well

Stereotype ThreatHow can the effects of stereotype threat be reversed? ◦ Simply understanding stereotype threat can improve performance.

◦ Reminding participants they were “selective northeastern liberal arts college” students eliminated the gender gap on a spatial ability test.

Social Categorization—Us Versus Them

The first step in prejudice ◦ Creation of groups

Putting some people into one group based on certain characteristics

This kind of categorization—an underlying theme of human social cognition Useful and necessary But can have profound implications

In-Group BiasPositive feelings and special treatment for people we have defined as being part of our in-group and negative feelings and unfair treatment for others simply because we have defined them as being in the out-group

The major underlying motive is self-esteem ◦ Individuals enhance self-esteem by identifying with specific social groups.

◦ Self-esteem is enhanced only if the individual sees these groups as superior to other groups.

In-Group Bias

Researchers have created entities that they refer to as minimal groups. ◦ Strangers are formed into groups using the most trivial criteria imaginable. In one experiment, participants watched a coin toss that randomly assigned them to either group X or group W.

◦ Despite being strangers before the experiment, group members behaved as if those in the same group were friends or family. They liked members of their own group better. They rated members of their in-group as more likely to have pleasant personalities and to have done better work than out-group members.

They allocated more rewards to those who shared their label.

Out-Group Homogeneity Effect

“They all look alike to me.”In-group members tend to perceive out-group members as being more similar (homogeneous) than they really are.

If you know something about one out-group member, you are more likely to feel you know something about all of them.

Social Categorization—Us Versus Them

For example, in Jane Elliot’s third-grade classroom, children grouped according to eye color began to act differently based on that social categorization.

Blue-eyed children, the superior group, stuck together and actively promoted and used their higher status and power in the classroom.

They formed an in-group, defined as the group with which an individual identifies.

The blue-eyed kids saw the brown-eyed ones as outsiders—different and inferior.

To the blue-eyed children, the brown-eyed kids were the out-group, the group with which the individual does not identify.

Dispositional Versus Situational Explanations or Attributions

One reason stereotypes are so insidious and persistent is the human tendency to make dispositional attributions.

Relying too heavily on dispositional attributions often leads us to make attributional mistakes (fundamental attribution error).

Ultimate attribution error: Our tendency to make dispositional attributions about an individual’s negative behavior to an entire group of people.

Dispositional Vs. Situational Explanations

Researchers had college students read fictionalized files on prisoners to make a parole decision.

Sometimes the crime matched the common stereotype of the offender.◦ Hispanic male—assault and battery◦ Upper-class Anglo-American—embezzlement

When crimes were consistent with stereotypes, students’ recommendations for parole were harsher.

Most students ignored additional information that was relevant to a parole decision but inconsistent with the stereotype (such as evidence of good behavior in prison).

Social Categorization—Us Versus Them

For example, in Jane Elliot’s third-grade classroom, children grouped according to eye color began to act differently based on that social categorization.

Blue-eyed children, the superior group, stuck together and actively promoted and used their higher status and power in the classroom.

They formed an in-group, defined as the group with which an individual identifies.

The blue-eyed kids saw the brown-eyed ones as outsiders—different and inferior.

To the blue-eyed children, the brown-eyed kids were the out-group, the group with which the individual does not identify.

Other Social-Psychological Factors

Cognitive DissonanceCrandall and Eschleman’s (2003) model

◦ Struggle between urge to express prejudice and the need to maintain positive self-concept (as a non-bigot) To conserve energy, seek valid justification for holding a negative attitude toward a particular out-group

Can then act against that group and still feel like a non-bigot: avoids cognitive dissonance

Defensive attribution/Just World: Blaming the victim serves a self-protective function◦ Can’t happen to me, wouldn’t behave that way

Economic/Resource Competition

Prejudice increases when times are tense and conflict exists over mutually exclusive goals. Example: Economic recession and violence against Latinos

◦ Realistic conflict theory: The idea that limited resources lead to conflict between groups and result in increased prejudice and discrimination◦ Limited resources conflict among groups prejudice and discrimination

When times are tough and resources are scarce:1. In-group members will feel more threatened by

the out-group.2. Incidents of prejudice, discrimination, and

violence toward out-group members will increase. 3. Sherif’s classic study—Eagles versus Rattlers

The Role of the Scapegoat

Scapegoating◦ When frustrated or unhappy, people tend to displace aggression onto groups that are disliked, visible, and relatively powerless

Form of aggression dependent on what in-group approves of or allows

The Contact Hypothesis

Mere contact between groups not sufficient to reduce prejudice◦Can create opportunities for conflict that may increase it

Prejudice will decrease when two conditions are met: ◦Both groups are of equal status.◦Both share a common goal.

When Contact Reduces Prejudice—Six Conditions

Sherif and colleagues (1961) found:◦ Once hostility and distrust were established, simply removing a conflict and the competition did not restore harmony.

◦ In fact, bringing two competing groups together in neutral situations actually increased their hostility and distrust.

Mutual InterdependenceThe need to depend on each other to

accomplish a goal that is important to each group.

When Contact Reduces Prejudice—Six Conditions Sherif and colleagues (1961) found:

◦ Once hostility and distrust were established, simply removing a conflict and the competition did not restore harmony.

◦ In fact, bringing two competing groups together in neutral situations actually increased their hostility and distrust.

◦ The key is mutual interdependence, the need to depend on each other to accomplish a goal that is important to each group.

Figure 13.7How Cooperation Fosters Intergroup RelationsWhen the Eagles and the Rattlers were in competition, very few of the boys in each group had friends from the other side. Intergroup tensions were eased only after the boys had to cooperate to get shared privileges and the boys began to make friends across “enemy lines.” (Based on data in Sherif, Harvey, White, Hood, & Sherif, 1961)

When Contact Reduces Prejudice—Six Conditions

1. Mutual interdependence2. Common goal3. Equal status4. Friendly, informal setting5. Knowing multiple out-group

members6. Social norms of equality

Jigsaw Classroom

Classroom setting designed to reduce prejudice and raise the self-esteem of children ◦ Placing children in small, desegregated groups

◦ Make each child dependent on the other children in the group to learn the course material and do well in the class

Reduces prejudice and promotes integration

Jigsaw Classroom

Why does the jigsaw work?◦ Breaks down perception of in-group and out-group, creates feeling of “one-ness”

◦ People must do each other “favors” by sharing information

◦ Develop empathy for others

One of the most effective ways of improving race relations, improving empathy, and improving instruction

Implicit Prejudice

Often aren’t aware of our prejudices.

How can it be prejudice if we aren’t even aware of it?◦ Can manifest in dangerous consequences.◦ Example

Studies have shown people more likely to accidentally shoot an unarmed African American than a White person