Prejudice and discrimination

what is prejudice?

An unjustifiable and usually negative attitude towards a culture, ethnicity, or gender group. =Pre judgment

what is discrimination?

The unjust of prejudicial treatment or different categories of people, (ethnicity, sex, disability) =action

Integrated threat theory (cognitive argument )

Argues that prejudice has 3 main parts:

1. stereotyping - an assumed characteristic based on biased view

2. realistic threat-competition for economy resources (jobs, lands, power)

3. symbolic threat - threat to one’s culture with different morals, social norms, and values (out group- in group)

Strengths of Integrated threat theory

• strong empirical support (lots of evidence)

• applies to many different groups (generalizable)

limitations of Integrated threat theory

• focuses on perception not real world

• causality unclear (bidirectional ambiguity) no clear -cause and effect

what studies support prejudice and discrimination?

• Harris and Fiske (2006)

• Phelps (2000)

Aim of Harris and Fiske (2006)

Investigate how stereotypes and prejudice toward extreme out-groups are represented in the brain, using fMRI to see neural responses (homeless, addicts)

procedure of Harris and Fiske (2006)

• 20 Princeton students

Shown pictures of people from different social groups:

• extreme out groups- homeless people, addicts

• non-extreme groups - students, elderly

• while viewing the pictures, participants brains were scanned using fMRI

• they rated warmth and competence of each group

• researchers looked for brain activity associated with emotions (disgust, empathy)

results of Harris and Fiske (2006)

Extreme out-groups:

• activated the insula, associated with disgust

• reduced activity in the medial prefrontal cortex, linked to thinking about others as human → evidence of dehumanization

Non-extreme out-groups:

• activated areas associated with empathy and social cognition

Strengths of Harris and Fiske (2006)

• supports- real world relevance ( why extreme groups are stigmatized)

• measured with fMRI → strong scientific evidence

Limitations of Harris and Fiske (2006)

• small sample size → limited generalizability

• artificial tasks → looking at photos in a lab →may not reflect real-life reactions

Aim of phelps (2000)

To investigate the role of the amygdala in processing racial prejudice and automatic emotional responses toward faces of different races

procedure of phelps (2000)

• white American volunteers

• shown faces of black and white individuals in an fMRI scanner

• measured amygdala activation (linked to emotional responses, fear or arousal)

• participants also completed implicit association test to measure unconscious racial bias

results of phelps (2000)

• higher amygdala activity when they viewed unfamiliar black faces compared to white faces

• the degree of amygdala activation correlated with IAT scores, suggesting a link between unconscious racial bias and neural response

• familiarity with faces reduced amygdala activation → suggests automatic bias can be moderated by experience

Strengths of phelps (2000)

• Use of fMRI → objective measurement of brain activity

• provides evidence for the biological basis of implicit racial bias

Limitations of phelps (2000)

• small sample → limited generalizability

• Artificial setting

what is an fMRI scan

maps brain. activity, detecting changes in blood flow and oxygen levels