Prejudice!

Question 1

Authoritarian personality-

Answer 1

early childhood importance, father figure importance, pressure buildup- psychodynamic influence. Displaced onto minority group target. Measure using f-scale. Adorno.

Question 2

Social dominance orientation,

Answer 2

societies need power differences, some people are inferior. Sometimes we need to look at societal shifts in understanding prejudice, individuality only gives some insight. For example, prejudice in US- pearl harbour, descriptions of Japanese shifted from positive.

Question 3

Realistic conflict theory-

Answer 3

Campbell. Summer camps, compete over resources, preselected groups of deviant, failure of one group will lead to failure of the other. Created prejudice, violence and raids, bias. Easy explanation- hormones argument. Personality was not a factor, it was collective.

Question 4

Eval RCT

Answer 4

evaluating this- Blake, trainee managers, ingroup preference, own group superiority, predispose us to feel we are the better group. Cannot prove realistic conflict being the only reason of prejudice- we do not always conflict over scarce resources or negative interdependence (group failure). Some groups do not hate each other, but in competitive environments team identity can be enhanced.

Question 5

Eval RCT2

Answer 5

Prejudice created in a few weeks- groups did not exist to begin with, not based solely on groups, more labelling the other because they are not similar to oneself.

Question 6

SIT

Answer 6

Social identity theory- Tajfel, line length judgements, categorisation bias, Using minimal conditions to see if there are preferences, schoolboys tossing coins, meaningless groups? Instead of taking most money, picked a choice that showed maximum difference between groups even at expense of money, ingroup bias exists without conflict or scarce resource. Replicated in other countries, might not explain hostility.

Question 7

RCT 2

Answer 7

Prejudice created in a few weeks- groups did not exist to begin with, not based solely on groups, more labelling the other because they are not similar to oneself.

id

Question 8

Social identity theory- interpersonal vs intergroup,

Answer 8

categories help us predict, connecting categories and self-esteem, stereotypes= world is predictable, strive for identity, strive to look for distinctiveness, does this have evolutionary benefits, being scared of others= survival value?

Question 9

Memory distortion

Answer 9

Memory distortion- memory impacted by stereotypical expectations, Duncan, confirmatory bias- black actors described as more violent, memory is not objective.

Question 10

Ultimate attribution error-

Answer 10

ingroup failure= other blame or situational excuses. When outgroup fails= they are at fault. E.g. private vs public schools. Pettigrew

Question 11

Three competent attitudes model

Answer 11

Three component attitude model, beliefs, strong feelings, intentions to behave in certain ways.

Question 12

Tokenism

Answer 12

 Tonkenism- action invoked to deflect accusations of prejudice. After performing favours, reluctant to engage in more effortful help. Small favour sometimes activated negative stereotypes. Seen in organisations that fail to take more important steps.

Question 13

Reverse discrimination

Answer 13

 Reverse discrimination- cannot tell if this is a desire to appear egalitarian, or if this is to conceal prejudice and be overly helpful.

Question 14

Evolutionary

Answer 14

 Evolutionary perspectives- higher animals have inherent fear of unfamiliar. Hebb.

Question 15

 Mere exposure

Answer 15

 Mere exposure- improvement in attitudes when repeated exposure or familiarity. Zajonc.

Question 16

Barrett

Answer 16

 Barrett, 5 and 10 yr olds expressed clear preferences for countries with no information.

Question 17

Frustration aggression

Answer 17

 Frustration aggression model- aggressive behaviour= frustration and frustration= aggression, Dollard. Achieve catharsis. In many cases agent of frustration is something higher, displace onto other target. Hovland- correlated economic index if frustrated ambitions and index of racial aggression.

Question 18

Frustration aggression A03 causality

Answer 18

 Difficult to know if aggression is displaced or generalised, specific target vs not. In experiment, participants not only felt strong towards race BUT also the fact it was authority.

Question 19

Berkowitz

Answer 19

 Aggression can occur in absence of frustration. Berkowitz, frustration being let out depends on presence of cues. Frustration is only one of a large number of diff causes and events.

Question 20

Mass intergroup aggression

Answer 20

 Mass intergroup aggression- in the models, groups are not exposed to history or communication, not active in social process, how do people select same targets as coincidence.

Question 21

Minnard

Answer 21

 Personality may predispose prejudice, but societal norms and culture is necessary. Minard, shifts in racism as a functions of norms, interracial contact was more important determinant of change In racial attitudes among children.

Question 22

Frustration aggression dramatic

Answer 22

 Dramatic and sudden changes in attitudes on single events, personalities do not have time to change this much.

Question 23

Rokeach

Answer 23

 Rokeach, cognitive style and dogmatism, resistance to change, appealing to authority, concept that reduces group phenomenon.

Question 24

RWA

Answer 24

 RWA, authoritarianism as collection of attitudes, adherence to conventions, support for aggression against deviants, submission to

authority, Altemeyer scale, ideology that varies, more affected by context, varying RWA in different context.

Question 25

Social dominance - ideologies

Answer 25

Social dominance- extent to which people accept or reject ideologies, desiring own group to be dominant have high SDO, encourages to reject egalitarian ideology. Inclined to prejudice. But this is highly context dependent, only plays a secondary role compared to group identity, issue with evolution- link between gender and social dominance disappears when strength of gender identification is factored.