Chapter 11 - Living in a Prejudiced World

Social dominance theory

Social dominance theory

A theory about the hierarchical nature of societies, how they remain stable, and how more powerful or privileged groups in a society maintain their advantage

Societies’ hierarchies tend to be based on age, gender, and an “arbitrary set” that takes different forms in different societies:

• Ethnicity (Rwanda, U.S., South America)

• Religion (Sunni vs Shia, Catholic vs Protestant)

• Race (countries with a history of slavery)

Individual discrimination

Individuals in the dominant groups act to preserve their advantage and to keep those in subordinate groups “in their place”

Institutional discrimination

Laws and norms preserve the hierarchy

Behavioural asymmetries

Deference is shown to members of dominant but not subordinate groups and self-fulfilling prophecies undermine the achievements of members of subordinate groups

Great Replacement Theory

Posits that White people throughout Europe and the United States are being “replaced” by non-White people from around the globe

Received considerable traction among various White supremacy groups

Social dominance orientation

A personality trait that corresponds to a person’s support for socioeconomic hierarchy and the belief that different groups should occupy higher and lower positions in society

People who score higher on this scale are more willing to express prejudiced attitudes toward different groups and are more inclined to endorse policies preserving existing hierarchies

Just world hypothesis

The belief that people get what they deserve in life and deserve what they get

Stems in part from the desire to be reassured that bad things won’t happen to us, we attribute terrible outcomes to something about the people who suffer them rather than to fate or chance

Dehumanization

The attribution of nonhuman characteristics and denial of human qualities to groups (generally to groups other than one’s own)

Sustained efforts to deny the humanity of outgroups have preceded some of the worst episodes of genocidal violence in modern times (Nazis, Khmer Rouge, Hutus)

Dehumanization occurs when:

• People think of others as different from themselves (immigrants, colonization)

• People feel strongly connected to their own ingroup and see it as distinct from various outgroups

• People see the world as chaotic and threatening

Anthropomorphism

The attribution of human traits, feelings, and intentions to nonhuman entities

We tend to anthropomorphize things to the extent that they resemble human beings, or when we’re feeling

Stereotype content model

A model that describes the nature of common group stereotypes, positing that they vary along the two prominent dimensions of warmth and competence

• Warmth: what are a person’s or group’s intentions?

• Competence: are they able to act on their kind or malevolent intentions?

Groups that are viewed most positively are thought to be seen as warm and competent and tend to be admired (Black professionals, the Irish, Americans)

Those viewed negatively as lacking in warmth and competence tend to be viewed with contempt (poor people, the homeless)

Ambivalent stereotypes are groups that are seen as high on one dimension but low on the other:

• High in competence but low in warmth are envied (Asians, the British)

• High in warmth but low in competence are pitied (old people, people with disabilities)

Stereotypes of the rich and poor

In more unequal societies, lower-SES individuals are more likely seen as lacking competence → fits social dominance theory because it serves to rationalize existing economic disparities

The elite, the rich, and politicians are seen as competent but cold

Stereotypes that people higher and lower on the socioeconomic ladder have of one another can negatively affect their interactions with each other

Bias in law enforcement

Biasing effect of the stereotype that links Black people with crime

• ex: Black Americans are often stopped more by the police despite the small Black population in certain areas

• ex: police interactions with White individuals contains more respectful language than interactions with Black individuals

Bias in hiring

Members of marginalized groups aren’t treated as well as dominant-group members are in the workplace

• ex: applications for job openings with stereotypically Black names receive fewer follow-ups for interviews than applications with stereotypically White names

• ex: this bias exists against foreign sounding names in Canada, Turkish sounding names in Germany, etc.

Bias in what is absent or withheld

Harm can also come from what people don’t do → members of marginalized groups often find that the world does not pay as much attention to them as it does to members of more dominant groups

Intersectional identities: people who have multiple nondominant identities tend to be relatively invisible to others because they are not prototypical members of their different identity groups

Systemic inequities

Historical or contemporary laws, policies, practices, and norms that advantage some groups in society and disadvantage others (ex: genders, racial, or ethnic groups) when it comes to such things as wealth, education, housing, and health care

• ex: white-collar crime is punished much less severely than crimes committed by members of marginalized groups (possession of crack vs powder cocaine)

• ex: men’s faces vs women’s bodies are more prominent in magazines

Institutional discrimination in terms of what’s absent

Marginalized groups are underrepresented in society at large (boardrooms, Hollywood studios, academic faculties, etc.)

• ex: the Hollywood Foreign Press Association’s voting body did not have a single person of colour

• ex: underrepresentation of Native Americans in U.S. media, education, history → proven to affect Native American students’ identity with school

• ex: underrepresentation of intersectional individuals

Language

• ex: use of “master” vs “head” at Yale → “master” is associated with men while “head” is more gender-neutral, and this effect was seen in students

Attributional ambiguity

Members of marginalized groups may not be able to tell whether their experiences have the same causes as the experiences of majority-group members do or whether their experiences are the result of prejudice

• ex: Black candidates receiving positive vs negative feedback did not feel the positive/negative effects on their self-esteem if they knew the White observer could see them because they didn’t know how to attribute the feedback

Stereotype threat

The fear of confirming the stereotypes that others have about one’s group

Undermines performance by increasing arousal which can interfere with performance on complex tasks, serves as a source of distraction that interferes with concentration on the task at hand

Can also make individuals want to avoid failure and play it safe knowing that their group is “suspect” in the eyes of others

Cost of concealment

Members of stigmatized groups throughout history have often felt compelled to hide their true identity

The concealment of sexual orientation is associated with cardiovascular stress

Concealment can also take a cognitive toll → perform worse on tasks

Marley hypothesis

The claim that different racial groups make different assessments of the amount of racism in society today because they differ in their knowledge of racial history

• ex: Black and White Americans believed there has been more progress done toward equality than there actually has been, and that economic conditions of White and Black Americans today are much more equal than they actually are

Related to contemporary debates about privilege and disadvantage