Stereotyping and Prejudice I

prejudice

An attitude or evaluation (typically negative) relating to a group and its members

stereotype

A belief about the personal attributes of a group of people

discrimination

Unjustifiable negative behaviour toward a group or its members

racial discrimination over time

• black/white anti-black bias has decreased

• black/white anti-white bias increased

• take home: racial discrimination has only partly reduced over time

  • white individuals view racial discrimination as zero-sum thinking

racial discrimination in employment study

• Question: Does race have an impact on likelihood of employment?

• IV: Race of application names

  • ‘White’ names (Emily, Greg)

  • ‘Black’ names (Lakisha, Jamal)

• DV: Callback for interview

• Results; those with ‘White” names were more likely to be hired

• Take home: Minorities are more likely to experience hiring discrimination

racial discrimination in criminal justice study

• Question: Does race impact courtroom outcomes?

• Setup: Photos of Black men convicted of murder were rated based on how “stereotypically Black” they looked (44 killed White men, 118 killed Black men

• Take home: More resemblance to ethnic stereotypes leads to worse outcomes

ADD MORE TO THIS ONE

Indigenous People of Canada

• Non-Indigenous Canadians, including students at MUN, tend to be ignorant of Indigenous Peoples (e.g., diversity, culture, history) and rely on stereotypes

• Indigenous Peoples in Canada are targets of prejudice and discrimination

• Only 30% of Indigenous Canadians have post-secondary education (vs. 52% of non-Indigenous Canadians)

• Post-Secondary Student Support Program (PSSSP): provides funding to Indigenous students to help address this disparity

• Indigenous students sometimes experience backlash for receiving funding, and such programs are not strongly supported by the public

Indigenous People of Canada Study

• Question: Why do people feel negatively about Indigenous post-secondary support?

• Setup: Non-Indigenous Canadians completed a variety of measures to determine what might explain their degree of support toward PSSSP

• Results: Program support among non-Indigenous Canadians could be explained by:

  • Less personal prejudice towards Indigenous Peoples

  • Less group zero-sum thinking

zero-sum thinking

• Decreased racism against Black individuals is matched with perceived increased racism against White individuals

• They may view better conditions for minorities as a threat to the dominant position of White people in the hierarchy

• They may also be motivated to believe in the myth of racial progress, to reduce feelings of responsibility, need for attention and concern

the objectification of women study

• Take home: Women are more likely to be viewed as sexual objects (instead of as individuals)

  • Many groups are subject to prejudice and discrimination

ADD MORE TO THIS

Robber’s Cave Experiment

• Question: What affects prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination?

• Intergroup competition: Scarce resources (realistic group conflict theory), perceived challenges to place in hierarchy/dominance

  • This can result in ethnocentrism (i.e., ingroup glorification/outgroup derogation), which leads to stereotyping?

• Setup: 22 ‘normal’ 11 year old boys attended a three week summer camp in 1954 in which they were divided into two groups – Rattlers and Eagles

• 3 stages of the experiment:

  • Group Formation

  • Intergroup competition

  • Reducing Intergroup Conflict

• Take home: Intergroup competition can partly explain intergroup prejudice, hostility, and ethnocentrism

  • It’s possible to reduce hostility, such as through superordinate (common) goals

  • Applied Example: Jigsaw Classroom

EXPLAIN LAST POINT

Robber’s Cave Experiment: Stage 1

Group Formation

• Each group engaged in a number of activities (e.g., swimming, cooking meals, canoeing) and bonded as a group

• Minimal supervision and guidance from counselors

• Campers made many of their own choices, formed hierarchies

Robber’s Cave Experiment: Stage 2

Intergroup competition

• Engaged in a tournament against each other – tug of war, touch football, baseball, etc.

• The other group was seen as an obstacle to desired goals

• After the competition, each participant rated both groups on a variety of traits (E.g., brave, tough, friendly, sneaky, smart alecs)

• Ingroups rated their own group more favourably than outgroups

• After the tournament, things escalated – there was name calling, flag stealing, and bunk raids

• The researchers wondered if non-competitive goals could help to reduce tension (e.g., eating together) — NOPE

Robber’s Cave Experiment: Stage 3

Can superordinate goals help reduce tension?

• ADD MORE DETAILS

Minimal group paradigm

groups based on something arbitrary or random

Minial groups study

• Setup: Participants were told they were assigned to groups based on whether they overestimated or underestimated the number of dots in the photo (but in reality, they were randomly assigned)

• They didn’t meet any other group members and didn’t know their identities

• Asked to assign points (for $) to ingroup and outgroup members

• People maximize relative gain for ingroup members, rather than maximize total gain

• Differences may occur almost automatically, via System 1

• Take home: People easily slip into us vs them mindsets, readily displaying ingroup favouritism

ADD MORE TO THIS

Social identity

• The “we” aspect of our self-concept that involved group memberships

• We categorize people (including ourselves) in groups, identify with certain groups (ingroups), and compare our groups with other groups (outgroups) with a favourable bias toward our own group (ingroup favouritism)

• We’re motivated to maintain our self-concept, sense of self-integrity, and self-esteem, which are partly based on group memberships

• Even in minimal groups, opportunities to display ingroup favouritism leads to higher self-esteem

Basking in reflected glory (BIRGing)

tendency for individuals to experience pride in the success of other with whom we are associated (e.g., groups, teams, friends, close others)

Basking in reflected glory study

• Setup: context of university football matches

• IV: Football win vs. lost

• DV: BIRGing via university clothing

• Results: Students more likely to wear university apparel the day after a win vs. a loss

  • More likely to use the term ‘we’ to describe the school’s win, especially if they had recently experienced a personal threat/failure

role of self-image study

• Question: is prejudice linked to self-image maintenance? Do we derogate others to boost our own self-esteem?

• Setup: participants interacted with a doctor, and then performed a lexical decision task

• IV:

  • Race of doctor (Black or White)

  • Feedback received (positive or negative)

• DV: reaction time for identifying words

• Results:

• Take home: When our selfimage is threatened, we seek to regain our lost self-esteem by expressing prejudice toward stereotyped targets

ADD MORE TO THIS