Stereotypes and prejudice

prejudice

Holding a negative attitude towards members of a group based solely on their membership of that group.

discrimination

The positive/negative behaviour that is directed towards a social group and its members.

what are prejudices based on?

Usually based on visible differences between people over which we have no control.

why aren’t stereotypes a good thing?

Because it means we aren’t being viewed as an individual.

social categorisation

Process of identifying a person as a member of a certain group because of certain features they share.

how are stereotypes related to social categorisation?

Stereotypes are a form of social categorisation, as they are based on ideas of shared features. Can be negative or positive.

what if a person is unidentifiable?

If a person is unidentifiable, their first impressions can form stereotypes, and lead us to hold expectations about the behaviour of others from those countries, professions etc.

Direct discrimination

Occurs when someone is treated unfairly and is disadvantaged because of a personal characteristic.

Indirect discrimination

Occurs when treating everybody the same way disadvantages someone because of a personal characteristic.

Factors that cause prejudice

• social influence

• intergroup competition

• social categorisation

• the just world phenomenon

Social influence (factors that cause prejudice)

Social influence is the way in which individuals adjust their behaviour to meet the demands of a social environment.

• positive, negative or neutral

• real or imagined

Intergroup competition (factors that cause prejudice)

Intergroup competition occurs when members of different groups compete for scarce, valuable resources.

• to achieve this, economic resources are involved.

• Robbers Cave (Sherif, 1961)

Social categorisation (factors that cause prejudice)

The process of identifying a person as a member of a group because they share certain features.

Just world phenomenon (factors that cause prejudice)

It assumes that people get what they deserve, people who have more than others use this to justify the inequality.

Factors that reduce prejudice

• intergroup contact

• mutual interdependence

• superordinate goals

• equality of status

Iintergroup contact (factors that reduce prejudice)

To increase the connect between groups who are prejudiced against each other. It is more likely to reduce if there is ongoing contact, relying on each other and equal status in the contact situation.

Sustained contact

Ongoing contact, either directly or indirectly over a period of time. Will break down a stereotype that was substantially based on minimal information obtained by secondary resources.

Contact hypothesis

Gordon Allport (1954). Proposes that certain types of direct contact between members of different groups can reduce prejudice. The assumption is that close, prolonged contact will cause a re-evaluation of the stereotypes and prejudice.

Mutual interdependence

Where the two different groups must have contact that makes them dependent on each other.

Superordinate goals

A goal that cannot be achieved by any group alone, and overrides the other existing goals which each group might have.

Equality of status

The status of the group refers to the importance of the groups when compared with another group, as perceived by members of the groups making the comparison.

Sherifs superordinate goals

1. camps water system broke, both groups had to fix it

2. they had to pool all their money together to watch a movie

3. a food truck stalled, both had to pull it

1st Hypothesis/aim (sherif, 1961)

When individuals who don’t know each other are brought together to interact in group activities in order to achieve common goals, they will produce a group structure with hierarchical statuses and roles within it.

2nd Hypothesis/aim (sherif, 1961)

When two ingroups, once formed, are brought into a functional relationship under conditions of competition and group frustration, attitudes and appropriate hostile actions in relation to the outgroup and its members will arise; these will be standardised and shared in varying degrees by group members

Phase 1

Ingroup formation (went for 5-6 days).

Did various activities etc together to build a group connection, roles…

Phase 2

Group conflict (went for 4-5 days).

Groups came into contact, competing in games and challenges, with prizes as incentive.

• groups became aggressive and mean towards the other group

• two day cooling off period, where they talked favourably about their group, and unfavourably about the other

Phase 3

Conflict resolution (went for 6-7 days).

Various means were tried to reduce animosity, superordinate goals worked well.

Criticisms/limitations/strengths

• Field experiment, therefore there was a high ecological validity.

• Two groups, with artificial competitions, therefore did not reflect reality.

• Ethical issues: participants were deceived and not protected from harm.

• Bias in the sample, therefore results cannot be generalised.

Conclusion

The experiment confirmed sherif’s realistic conflict theory.