Exam II Concepts Flashcards
Social learning theory
Children learn behaviors from peers, parents, teachers, and others. This includes stereotypes. Social learning can be direct and indirect, and it allows children to understand social roles (ex: boys and girls are rewarded for different things)
Media effects
Stereotypes can be transmitted through media (tv, radio, podcasts, music, etc.)
Children who watch more TV hold stronger gender/racial stereotypes
Adults who watch the news develop stronger stereotypes and prejudice toward Blacks and Muslims
Includes nonverbal bias
Qualifiers
Communicate an EXCEPTION to a rule
Ex: FEMALE doctor or MALE nurse
Deviations
Deviations from white, middle class English is considered “socially unacceptable”
Comedy
Jokes transmit stereotypes → make them seem acceptable → increased stereotype use and beliefs in joke teller
laughs = reward
Consequences towards others: Attention
We fixate/attend to information that is stereotype consistent
WE LOOK FOR WHAT WE EXPECT
Consequences toward others: Perception
We identify stereotype-consistent information faster & are prone to make errors that fit with stereotypes
Consequences toward others: Interpretation
We interpret ambiguous stimuli based on stereotypes
Ex. A picture of a rockstar is seen as louder than that of a librarian
Consequences toward others: Evaluation
Group stereotypes influence evaluation of individuals
Ex. Rap is black and country is white
Consequences toward others: Memory
Stereotypes affect people’s memories about social interactions
Why do we use schemas?
They help make ambiguous/unclear info make sense
Selected attention
Stereotypes direct our attention to certain information
Seeing black: race, crime, and visual processing (Eberhardt et al 2004)
Black faces triggered a racialized seeing → facilitated the processing of crime-related objects (regardless of differences in racial attitudes)
Crime-related images (or no images) flashed → participants must quickly identify a dot → participants were quicker to look at the black face when crime-related images showed
Black faces triggered a racialized seeing → facilitated the processing of crime-related objects (regardless of differences in racial attitudes)
What was the prime/where did increased attention go?
PRIME social category (Black ppl)
INCREASED ATTENTION TO stereotype-consistent information (Crime-related images)
Crime-related images (or no images) flashed → participants must quickly identify a dot → participants were quicker to look at the black face when crime-related images showed
What was the prime/where did increased attention go?
PRIME Stereotype-consistent information (Crime-related images)
INCREASED ATTENTION TO Social category (Black ppl)
Face drawing Study
Racially ambiguous faces (black/white)
→ Demographic info shared (only difference was whether they were called white or black) → participants drew faces DIFFERENTLY based on the race given using stereotypes
Biased perception. Identification. (Payne 2001)
Black is associated with violence → participants are given a face and a blurry image → they must identify the image as it gets more clear → Participants were FASTER and made MORE ERRORS when the face was black and the object was NOT a weapon
The police officer’s dilemma
Participants must decide to shoot/not shoot a target (white or black) based on what he is holding → black targets were shot faster and more accurately
THIS IS COGNITIVE, NOT PREJUDICE
Sex Differences: A Study of the Eye of the Beholder (Condry & Condry)
one infant is given either a boy or girl name → participants watch it react to a scary toy → the boy is labeled angry and the girl is labeled afraid
one infant is given either boy or girl clothes → boy outfit made participants give the baby stereotypically male traits and vise versa for the girl outfit
Biased interpretation
Ambiguous behavior → described with stereotype-consistent info → we act stereotypically because that’s what is expected
Biased evaluation
Members of stereotyped groups tend to be judged based on group-specific standards
Identical applicant, different outcomes (Rattan et al. 2019)
Asian woman applicant → gender priming vs race priming → received better rating when primed as Asian than when primed as woman
Consequences toward others: Evaluation
Group stereotypes influence the evaluation of individuals
Ex. Rap is black and country is white
Advantages of biased memory
Stereotypes fill in gaps in event memories, stereotypes cue recall
Assimilation (Biased memory)
Remembering a behavior as more stereotype-consistent than it was
Source confusion (Biased memory)
Incorrectly remembering a stereotype as being performed by group member when it was someone else (non-member)
Bisased Memory. Decoys. (Dunning & Sherman 1997)
Participants given sentences to read → Memory test with inferences that were either stereotype-consistent or inconsistent → falsely recognized stereotype-consistent info, participants were less likely to recognize inconsistent info
Stereotype threat
Stereotype impacts performance due to fear of being judged
Stereotype threat Study (Spencer et al. 1999)
Difficult math test → gender is mentioned as either relevant or irrelevant→ the mere mention of gender being irrelevant eliminated women’s underperformance
Sources of stereotype threat
Simple cues of stereotyped identity
Ex: writing gender before test
Mechanisms of stereotype threat
Effort, working memory, conscious attention
Effort (stereotype threat)
Fear of confirming stereotype → increased stress → performance deficits
Working memory (stereotype threat)
increased attention and focus on signs of failure + efforts to suppress negative thoughts → takes up extra mental effort
Conscious attention (stereotype threat)
Increased monitoring of failures → more controlled thinking → second-guessing
Consequences of stereotype threat
Lowered performance, negative emotions, withdrawal
Intervention (stereotype threat)
Reconstructing tests, identity-safe environments, coping/self-affirmation
Latent ability
When the weight is removed, you outperform opponents
Confirmation bias
You see what you look for
Factors of confirmation bias
Info seeking, info spreading, info recall
We look for, share, and remember what we expect
Information Seeking Study (Snyder & Swann, 1978)
Extravert or introvert → question choice → participants asked the extroverts questions that fit with being extroverted more than about being introverted
Info Recall Study (Cohen 1981)
Participants watch a video of a waitress or librarian → video containing half waitress and half librarian traits is shown → Participants more easily recalled stereotype-consistent information
Self-fulfilling prophecy
Stereotype creates expectations in perceiver → perceiver’s behavior is influenced → influences observer behavior → prophecy fulfilled
Self-fulfillment Interview (Word, Zanna, & Cooper, 1974)
White participants act as interviewers → Less time with and more errors with Black candidates + sat further from them
White CONFEDERATE interviewers + WHITE participants → two conditions: act like the interviewers when the interviewee was white and when black → blk condition = worse performance
Linguistic biases
We use different language to describe ingroup vs outgroup members who are engaging in the exact SAME actions
When do we use abstract descriptions
(Hard to disprove, general, universal)
Outgroup -
Ingroup +
When do we use concrete descriptions
(Discountable, easy to disprove, “it was just one time”)
Outgroup +
Ingroup -
Differentiate between linguistic biases and the ultimate attribution error
Linguistic bias involves the words/descriptions we use to explain behavior.
Ult attribution error involves the explanation we attribute to a behavior.
Subtyping
Creation of separate groups to explain deviant members
If you disconfirm, you are an exception to the rule
Suppression
Automatic monitoring and controlled suppression = stereotyping
Out of mind but back in sight (Macrae et al. 1994)
Write a story describing a neo-Nazi skinhead → instructed to either avoid thinking of stereotypes or with no instruction → participants are told they will meet him → suppression brings out MORE stereotyping
Bookkeeping model
We need to understand the purpose of stereotypes → revise when they are no longer functional
Accounting - add and subtract info, confirm and disconfirm evidence
Adjustment - tweak schemas
Time - change is slow
The racism monster
Someone is either a racist and therefore an inhuman monster, or they’re an actual, complex being, and therefore, by definition, incapable of being a racist.” (Demby 2014)
The Doll Test (Clark & Clark )
White doll and black doll → children are asked questions → from 3 yrs old, children identified race differences, racial pref for white dolls
Prejudice in children: Categorization
Categories simplify the world
Prejudice in children: Labels
Gender labels used by 3 yrs
Prejudice in children: Biases
Racial bias begins around 4-5 and declines from 6-9 as control increases
Is stereotype threat an issue for children?
Yes :(
Social learning theory
Reinforcement + modeling
Inner state theory
Prejudice is caused by something within (such as personality)
Cognitive development
Changes in prejudice result from mental development and interaction with one’s environment
Garett Morgan
Black inventor, people did not recognize his achievements due to racism, even when he rescued people with his gas masks/smoke hoods, they ignored him in retelling the story for news
Prejudice throughout time (Pre WWII to now)
Pre WWII - overt, institutional laws
post 1954 - Civil rights mvt., racism goes from normal → bad
Old-fashioned prejudice
“Biological” inferiority; blatant, sanctioned exclusion
Modern-symbolic prejudice
Justifying group differences; supporting minority-injuring ideologies
Aversive prejudice
Rationalize aversion, deny motivation; not recognizing strongly biased implicit attitudes
Ambivalent prejudice
Conscious conflict between pro/anti beliefs
Factors of modern-symbolic prejudice: mild to moderate anti-target group emotions
Usually acquired through social learning
Factors of modern-symbolic prejudice: belief in traditional values
Hard work, individualism, self-reliance, etc.
LIVE UP TO MY VALUES
Factors of modern-symbolic prejudice: high opportunity-based egalitarianism
Equality of opportunity - everyone should have an equal, fair chance at success in life (no legal barriers, so if your life sucks, that’s on you)
Factors of modern-symbolic prejudice: Low outcome-based egalitarianism
Equality of outcome - the belief that social structure should ensure everyone receives equally
Factors of modern-symbolic prejudice: Group self-interest
Promote interest of the group, respond negatively to perceived threats
Factors of modern-symbolic prejudice: Little personal knowledge of the target group
General dislike and set of beliefs
Modern-symbolic vs. aversive
Aversive - want to be seen as unprejudiced, avoid interracial contact
Aversive interactions (Mendes et al., 2002)
Nonblack participant interacts w/ black OR white confederate → Cooperative activity → Work WORSE with black confederate, higher stress response, and rate the performance better even though it isn’t
Ambivalent Amplification (Bell & Esses (1997))
Describe attitudes towards natives → organize evaluations into ambivalent/non → listen to music to induce a mood → individuals who were ambivalent toward native peoples showed greater difference between positive and negative mood (amp.)
Brown paper bag test
Anyone darker than the bag color was denied entry to the party
Hostile-benevolent prejudice
Hostile - traditional prejudice
goes hand-in-hand with benevolent prejudice - expression of prejudice through “positive” emotional responses to the target
Laissez-faire
Hands-off/not my problem
