Prejudice Flashcards
What is prejudice
Little consensus on terms definition
Mutually agreed basic tenets
1. Occurs between groups
2. Involves a negative or positive evaluation
3. Involves a bias in favour or against a group
4. Is based on characteristics (real or imagined) that are attributed to a group
Jones (2002)
Prejudice is considered a positive or negative attitude, directed towards members of other social groups, determined by virtue of their membership status within a particular social group.
Prejudice according to jones 2002
An attitude directed towards another person or group based on the group they belong to
Contingent on group membership
Not only negative but by virtue of viewing other groups negatively we inherently view our own group as positive
attitude of prejudice
A general feeling or evaluation, positive or negative about a person object or issue
Three component model of attitude
Cognitive, beliefs about the Attitude object/person/group e.g. negative stereotypes
Affective - strong feelings about the attitude object/person/group and qualities it may or may not possess
Behavioural - an intention to act a certain way towards attitude object
Affective component
Prejudice clearly concerned with emotions towards social groups
The affective dimension refers to an individuals feelings or emotional responses towards a particular social group
E.g. Gays associated with feelings of disgust and discomfort
Aboriginal Canadians associated with feelings of unease or anger (zanna 1994)
Cognitive component
Refers to an individuals perceptions, attributes judgements and beliefs about a group (huskinson and haddock 2006)
Stereotypes (feature based beliefs)
Can be positive or negative providing the holder with simplistic assumptions about a social group
Cognitive component also contains value based beliefs, defined as specific beliefs that social groups violate or promote the attainment of individuals cherished values
The behavioural component
Discrimination
A negative action towards a social group or its members (allport 1954)
Discrimination
An unjustified negative or harmful action towards a member of a group simply because of his or her membership of that group
A negative action toward a social group or members on account of their group membership (allport 1954)
Mild to severe behavioural component
Mild, e.g. Avoiding people of certain groups
Medium e.g. Expressing verbally antipathy
Severe eg deliberate victimisation
Targets of prejudice and discrimination
Sexism Gender Racism Age Disability
Changing face of prejudice
In western societies laws and political correctness have affected attitudes towards certain groups, e.g. Gay and lesbians
So no longer are people overtly prejudiced, so traditional forms of prejudice appear to have diminished, although certain individuals are still overtly prejudiced (tougas brown beaten and joly 1995)
Old fashioned prejudice
Overt in nature
Rooted in religious and moral beliefs
Rooted in common inaccurate misconceptions mcConahay 1986
Modern prejudice
More covert in nature
Reflects beliefs certain groups are pushing too far in society for undeserved gains
Reflects beliefs prejudice is largely a thing of the past
Mcconahay 1986
old fashioned prejudice towards gays and lesbians
Morrison and Morrison (2002)
Old fashioned homonegativity
Homosexuality is a sin and contravenes gods law
Gay men and women are mentally sick
Modern homonegativity
Gay men and women are pushing too hard for underserved gains in society
Homophobia is historical
They contribute to their own marginalisation by placing emphasis on their own sexual orientation
Forms of discrimination
Reluctance to help. E.g. Landlords reluctant to rent to ethnic minorities
Tokenism. trivial positive act towards minority group to prevent criticism
Reverse discrimination. Going out of your way to favour person of minority group to make self look good
Social stigma
Stigmatised individuals posses or are believed to posses an attribute or characteristic that conveys a social identity that is devalued in society leading to possible prejudice
Visible stigmas include race gender obesity
Concealable stigmas include homosexuality, illnesses, religious group membership.
People can try and hide their own stigmas to avoid prejudice, can become internalised stigma
Stereotype threat
When individuals try to avoid stereotypes assigned to their group membership, e.g., West Indian Briton aware of stereotype black People are less intelligent tries hard to appear intelligent went answering class question, causing anxiety. Anxiety may affect answering question so stereotype can become a self fulfilling prophecy
Extremes of prejudice and discrimination
Genocide, dehumanisation, violence
E.g. Jews in world war 2
Explanations of prejudice and discrimination.
Mere exposure effect, zajonc 1968
Learnt, allport and tajifel suggest learnt from early childhood
Inherent fear of unknown
Processeses such as social identity theory
Scapegoat theory
Scapegoat theory is a social psychological term that relates to prejudice. According to this theory, people may be prejudice toward a group in order to vent their anger. In essence, they use the group they dislike as their target for all of their anger…as a vent. One example that has been suggested is the holocaust. According to scapegoat theory, the Germans used the Jews as scapegoats for all of their countries problems (which included economic problems across the country), focused all of their anger on the Jews, allowed their anger and hatred to build, and focused all of their anger, frustration, and problems on the Jews. (This is not “the” explanation for the holocaust, but one component of it.)
Read more: http://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Scapegoat%20Theory#ixzz4UWt1TxRm
Frustration aggression theory
Definition: The frustration-aggression theory argues that social movements occur when frustration leads to collective, often aggressive behavior. Frustration has a variety of sources and can take two forms. First, it can be absolute, which happens when people do not have enough to survive, and second, it can be relative, which happens when people have enough to survive but have less than those around them.
Displacement
Psychodynamic concept referring to the transfer of negative feelings on to an individual or group
The authoritarian personality
Adorno 1950
Authoritarian Personality was an attempt by a group of researchers to explain the conditions that allowed Nazi-ism to gain a foothold in Europe. The researchers, led by Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer, used various psychological scales to attempt to explain racism and the atmosphere that led to the slaughter of six million Jews and others in psychological terms. The book weighed in at a hefty near-1000 pages, and included contributions from a number of social psychologists who helped to correlate and analyze the data collected.
3 approaches to prejudice
Personality
Social cognition
Group membership
Personality theory of prejudice
Authoritarian personality linked to socialisation in childhood
Emotional as well as cognitive dimensions,influenced by socio political circumstances as well as internal mechanisms
Authoritarian personality
Roots lie in harsh childhood experience especially within patriarchal capitalist society
Features include
Respects perceived strength
Obedience
Dislikes weakness
Conformist
The f scale
Evidence for, correlation on scales between authoritive personality and prejudice
Linking of racism between parents and children
Against, role of context overlooked, role of culture overlooked
Group membership theories of prejudice
Sherif and sherif realistic group conflict theory
Turner and tajifel
Social identity theory
Realistic group conflict theory
Scarcity of resources leads to competition leading to intergroup conflict
Individuals fall in line with the feelings and behaviour of their group (in group) towards the out group
Evidence
The robbers cave study
(Sherif and sherif 1969)
But methodological flaws
Criticisms of realistic group conflict theory
If prejudice is a natural response to group conflict how can it be a problem
Prejudice is not universal so why are some groups targeted more than other
Methodological flaws e.g. Role of experimenters
The contact hypothesis
ordon W. Allport (1954) is often credited with the development of the contact hypothesis, also known as Intergroup Contact Theory. The premise of Allport’s theory states that under appropriate conditions interpersonal contact is one of the most effective ways to reduce prejudice between majority and minority group members.[3] If one has the opportunity to communicate with others, they are able to understand and appreciate different points of views involving their way of life. As a result of new appreciation and understanding, prejudice should diminish.
Criteria and conditions for contact to reduce prejudice
Equal status Equal status. Both groups must engage equally in the relationship. Members of the group should have similar backgrounds, qualities, and characteristics. Differences in academic backgrounds, wealth, skill, or experiences should be minimized if these qualities will influence perceptions of prestige and rank in the group.[5]
Common goals. Both groups must work on a problem/task and share this as a common goal, sometimes called a superordinate goal, a goal that can only be attained if the members of two or more groups work together by pooling their efforts and resources.
Intergroup cooperation. Both groups must work together for their common goals without competition. Groups need to work together in the pursuit of common goals.[5]
Support of authorities, law or customs. Both groups must acknowledge some authority that supports the contact and interactions between the groups. The contact should encourage friendly, helpful, egalitarian attitudes and condemn ingroup-outgroup comparisons.
Personal interaction. The contact situation needs to involve informal, personal interaction with outgroup members. Members of the conflicting groups need to mingle with one another. Without this criterion they learn very little about each other and cross-group friendships do not occur.
Critical perspective prejudice
We don’t have prejudice we do it
Discursive psychology approach
The categories groupings identities and evaluations involved in language occur through language
The task for researchers is to identify the key linguistic resources through which prejudices occur
How does prejudice happpen through the way we talk about ourselves and others
Examples of critical perspective of prejudice
That’s so gay
Her husband took the maternity leave she was back the next day, have you noticed she even looks like a man
Personality perspective of prejudice
Linked to harsh childhood
Abnormal childhood socialisation leads to authoritarian personality
Cognitive perspective to prejudice
Prejudice is due to normal limitations of our cognitive processes
Group membership perspective of prejudice
Social identity and realistic conflict approaches explain prejudice
Critical social psychology approach to prejudice
Prejudice is embedded in language
Implicit association test
The Implicit Association Test (IAT) measures attitudes and beliefs that people may be unwilling or unable to report. The IAT may be especially interesting if it shows that you have an implicit attitude that you did not know about. For example, you may believe that women and men should be equally associated with science, but your automatic associations could show that you (like many others) associate men with science more than you associate women with science.
