Prejudice And Conflict Flashcards
Rokeach
Dogmatic personality; cognitive rigidity; aberrationist account
Fiske and Taylor
Cognitive miser; social world is complex so we take shortcuts=> stereotypes; accentuation principle
Fazio- 1995
Implicit prejudice
Hughenberg and bodenhausen
Perceptions of facial threat
Sherif
Realistic conflict theory; Robbers cave studies
Tajfel
Minimal groups - Klee vs Kadinsky
Hunter (1991)
Newsreel footage of Milltown Catholic funeral vs Anderstown British soldiers
Attributions of Catholics vs Protestants
Kerr
Interviews with Catholics and Protestant political activists
Loyalist violence is either essential to prevent worse atrocities or ‘right-wing, fascist and terrorist’
Adorno
Authoritarian personality; aberrationist account
Fisher’s pyramid
People who were more racist were more likely to ‘regularise’ the pyramid after 4 weeks => inflexible black/white thinking, no grey
Allport- prejudice and conflict
Stereotypes: faulty, implicit generalisations
Edwards, Potter and Wetherell
Edwards and Potter focus on discourses and interpretative repertoires; stereotypes are possible because we share common language and jointly construct identities and relationships. Stereotyping is active, flexible and competing with other constructions serving social, political functions. Legitimate some violence and delegitimate others.
Brewer and Miller
Contact for conflict reduction: works best if group diffs are de-emphasised, and people see each other as individuals
Decategorisation model of contact
Hewstone and brown
Contact should be intergroup; participants need to see others as representatives of that social category
Pluralist model of contact
Gaertner and Dovidio
Contact only works if all ppts become members of a new in group ‘we’
Re categorisation model of contact
Limits of contact hypothesis
- ‘celebrating difference’ can emphasise differences and reinforce prejudice
- idealistic: it’s all very well in theory, but hard to achieve in reality, given structural divisions (especially since conditions for it to work are pretty restrictive eg. Equal status, equal numbers)- how can it work in reality
- interpersonal changes in perceptions may not affect intergroup changes in perceptions
- what if prejudice is to do with one group’s position vid-a-vis another, and is unaffected by interpersonal interactions?
Hopkins and Hopkins
Some Muslims see contact as a way of dispelling prejudice, others see it as a threat to identity, purity ( a source of decadence, moral corruption, subversion of Muslim identity)
Positive features of intergroup conflict
- Groups create solidarity
- can forge positive collective identities and values
- conflict provides fire for social change
- disrupts inequality
- can promote fairer distribution of resources
Dogmatic personality
Rokeach
Aversive Racist Theory
Dovidio and Gaertner
- people who consciously sympathise with victims of historical injustice and claim to support racial equality but have unconscious negative attitudes
- shows that bigotry is complicated, not just a personality type - people have a stratified response to others
What did Sherif call it when he put his groups of boys into direct competition?
What were the effects?
Negative goal interdependence
- increased in group solidarity
- increased outgrown prejudice and violence, burning rival flags etc
What did Sherif call it when he made his groups of boys work together?
What were the effects?
Positive goal interdependence
- negative intergroup perceptions were reduced.
Tajfel’s evaluation of RCT
- competition for resources is sufficient but not necessary
- It doesn’t explain the historical patterning - waxing and waning - of intergroup conflict
- it doesn’t explain the thought processes that happen within social groups and leads to conflict
Discursive psychology is all talk
It ignores what ppl are thinking/feeling- and therefore what drives their behaviour- can it be complete on its own?
