factors affecting prejudice: individual differences: situation

Question 1

how do changes in levels of prejudice over time relate to situational factors rather than personality?

Answer 1

• levels of prejudice in society rise and fall, but personality traits are stable over time
• sudden changes in prejudice are more likely to be influenced by the situation at the time rather than inherent personality traits
• the idea that prejudice arises from a scarcity of resources supports this view, as such situations can provoke or exacerbate prejudice

Question 2

supporting evidence: C + W

Answer 2

• Cooper and Whitney 2009
• in examples of strong prejudice, such as the rise in anti-Semitism in Germany before and during WWII, situational factors play a significant role
• strength of the economy
• availability of resources
• these factors seem to have a stronger influence on prejudice than personality traits

Question 3

what is the key difference between RCT and SIT?

Answer 3

• RCT: emphasises competition for limited resources as the cause of prejudice and intergroup conflict
• SIT: focuses on how group membership and identification lead to prejudice, even without direct competition

Question 4

how does RCT explain prejudice, and how is this demonstrated in Sherif’s “Robbers Cave” study?

Answer 4

• prejudice and discrimination arise when there is competition for limited resources (real or perceived)
• competition can be over jobs, land, popularity, etc, especially when resources seem scarce
• Sherif: showed the effect of competition on two groups of boys, leading to in-group/out-group mentality, prejudice, and conflict
• prejudice and conflict were reduced by replacing competition with cooperation in tasks that required both groups to work together

Question 5

what does SIT say about prejudice, and how is this demonstrated in Henri Tajfel’s “minimal group studies”?

Answer 5

• there’s no need for competition
• just recognising someone as being from an out-group is enough to trigger prejudice and discrimination
• Tajfel: conducted his “minimal group studies” on Bristol schoolboys
• boys were split into meaningless groups based on their taste in modern art
• they were asked to allocate points to their group or other groups, either fairly or unfairly
• boys always allocated points unfairly, favoring their in-group over the out-group, even though they didn’t know who the individuals were
• this shows that even a minimal group (a group you don’t care about belonging to) can trigger discrimination

Question 6

strength: application

Answer 6

• Nazi soldiers imposed a boycott of Jewish businesses
• Nazis portrayed Jews as competition with the German people for wealth

Question 7

weakness: application

Answer 7

• Tajfel was a Polish Jew whose family was sent to concentration camps by the Nazis
• Tajfel believed the Holocaust was about more than just competition, as his family was poor, not wealthy

Question 8

what explains sudden changes in prejudice in society?

Answer 8

• personality remains stable over time
• levels of prejudice in society rise and fall over time
• sudden changes in prejudice are due to the situation at the time
• a scarcity of resources can contribute to increased prejudice

Question 9

what was the Stanford Prison Experiment and what did it reveal about the pathology of power?

Answer 9

• Stanford Prison Experiment (1971) involved students playing roles of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison
• exp was supposed to last a month but was cancelled after 6 days due to extreme hostility from guards and prisoner breakdowns
• guards became authoritarian, and power “went to their heads,” leading them to psychologically torture the prisoners
• Zimbardo, the “Governor,” became “sucked into” his role and was only made aware of the situation by his fiancée, Christina Maslach
• Zimbardo calls this phenomenon “the pathology of power,” where power distorts thinking and behaviour
• the pathology of power explains discrimination when one group has power over another and internalises their roles