Prejudice

Definition of Prejudice

unjustified negative attitude towards an individual based solely on that individuals membership in a group

its a social orientation - social group not just individual

based on ‘faulty’ belief - irrational and held in disregard of the facts

Early root of Prejudice

Competition between groups

zero-sum outcomes are in short supply - if one group gets them the other doesn’t

Sherif et al (1961)

2 groups of boys left to bond and develop norms

then placed against each other where there was a clear divide

but when working together again, went back to normal

but eliminating competition didn’t eliminate prejudice

Social Categorisation - “Us vs Them”

Social Identity Theory

continuum between interpersonal and intergroup

interpersonal - relate entirely as individuals, no awareness of social categories and self-concept = own memories, behaviours and emotions

intergroup - relate entirely entirely as group representatives, individual characteristics overwhelmed by group membership and self-concept = social identity deriving from social category

Tajfel et al (1971)

set out to examine the effects of social categorisation on participants intergroup behaviour

created a situation where: no face-to-face interaction, no link, anonymous and no value to participant

told to pick a painting and make decisions

finding - participants act in terms of their in-group membership and favour theor in-group by maximising rewards over out-group

Is Prejudice Decreasing?

stereotypes are generally becoming more positive

greater representation of ethnic minority groups in non-stereotypical roles in media and professional occupations

but still inequalities exist and rise in nationalism

Sigall and Page (1971)

60 male participants characterise how true traits are of ‘Americans’ and ‘African Americans’

led to believe an independent and distortion-free physiological measure of attitudes was obtained (bogus pipeline = polygraph)

found more negative traits attributed to African Americans in the bogus pipeline

Crosby (1980) - Unobstrusive Observations

reviewed naturalistic studies that had observed helping behaviour in inter-ethnic settings

50% of studies showed more help given to someone of same ethnicity

white people helping people was context dependant:

face-to-face - 1/3 pro-white bias

no face-to-face contact - ¾ showed pro-white bias

Weitz (1972) - Controlled vs Spontaneous

told 80 white male participants that they would be meeting another student, given a description of their partner (white vs black) and recorded an audio instructions for an upcoming task and reported how much they expected to like the person

findings - negative correlation between expected inking ad measures of warmth when white students expected to interact with a black person

Vanmann et al (1997)

used electromyography to measure electrical activity from muscle group

viewed slides of white and black people and imagined interacting with them

showed more activity from ‘frown muscles’ to photos with black people

Unconscious Associations

researchers have developed means of measuring unconscious associations between evaluations and concepts (IAT)

Dovidio, Kawakami and Gaertner (2002)

compared the effects of explicit and implicit attitudes on self ratings and other ratings during 40 white participants interactions with black vs white targeted

findings:

implicit = nonverbal friendliness

explicit = verbal friendliness

members leave with different impressions of interaction because of focus on different signals

implicit and explicit attitude have different consequences for controlled vs spontaneous forms of communication

Adversive Racism

people now have conflicting attitudes

endorse values and feel sympathy towards minorities

socialised with negative images of minorities and feeling of unease

expressed by anxiety in avoidance of inter-ethnic setting

Allport (1954) - Intergroup Contact

increased contact → recognise similarities → change categorisation

conditions = equal status, cooperation, common goals, institutional support

Pettigrew and Tripp (2006)

meta-analysis of 713 samples

contact reduces intergroup prejudice

contact effect generalise to entire out-group, emerging across a broad range of targets

benefits for racial prejudice as well as other forms

Vonofakou, Hewstone and Voci (2007)

heterosexual participants assessed existing friendships with gay peers

perceived closeness → reduced intergroup anxiety

Common In-group Identity Model (Gaerner, 1994)

extent that individuals from different social groups come to view themselves as belonging to a single social entity

attitudes may become more positive

Wohl and Branscombe (2005)

Jewish Americans participants induced to either think about the holocaust as something germans did (social group salient) or an example of what humans have done to other humans (human-identity salient)

found seeing genocide as a historical act rather than a specific social group act = more forgiving

Social Influence

when the in-group endorses stereotypes, in-group beliefs are more predictive of prejudice than individuals personal beliefs

Stanford, Sechrist and Jost (2001)

white student asked to estimate % of African Americans possessing various stereotypical traits and given info about social norms

a. favourable feedback condition - others more positive

b. unfavourable feedback condition - more positive than others

participants shift their answers closer to the perceived group norm