Prejudice and Discrimination

Question 1

How many theories are there in regards to prejudice?

Answer 1

Social Identity Theory (S.I.T) and Realistic Conflict Theory (R.C.T)

Question 2

What is stereotyping?

Answer 2

The idea of developing an idea about a person and then applying it to people who are similar - they are common ideas attributed to a large group of people

Question 3

Why does stereotyping lead to prejudice?

Answer 3

It leads to prejudice as it can affect someone’s attitudes towards the large group of people e.g. not only thinking of women as weak but thinking ill of them as a result of this. This can eventually lead to discrimination

Question 4

What is some important research to consider when thinking of research into prejudice?

Answer 4

Sherif et al. (1954/1961) and Tajfel et al. (1970)

Question 5

define realistic conflict theory (RCT)

Answer 5

the idea that when there are two groups of equal status who are competing over the same scarce resources e.g. jobs, water,land, oil and trophies; there shall be conflict and prejudice will follow, including stereotyping and discrimination as the outgroup is seen as threatening the in-group’s resources

Question 6

define superordinate goal

Answer 6

a mutually beneficial objective or outcome that cannot be achieved without co-operation/collaboration between two or more groups

Question 7

define social identity theory (SIT)

Answer 7

suggests that prejudice comes from formation of two groups - no other factor, like competition is needed. The mere existence of two groups causes conflict

Question 8

define social categorisation

Answer 8

seeing oneself as part of a particular group - this is one’s in-group

Question 9

define minimal differences/minimal groups

Answer 9

groups of people where there is no history or competition - groups are categorised only on the basis of some slight (minimal) differences between them

Question 10

define in-group favouritism

Answer 10

when people act in ways that benefit other members of their own in-group and/or disadvantage members of out-groups

Question 11

what research methods are used in ‘research into prejudice’?

Answer 11

field experiment

Observation; tape recordings; sociometric analysis

Question 12

why is Sherif et al. (1954/1961) important to research into prejudice?

Answer 12

Sherif (1954/1961) found that prejudice and discrimination could be established between two groups of boys in a realistic situation, by allowing the groups to form group norms, then introducing competition between the two groups.

After competition was introduced in Stage 2 of the Robbers Cave experiment, there were strong negative attitudes and hostility towards the boys in the other group, shown by name-calling, who the boys were friends with, and burning one of the flags of the other group.

After tasks involving cooperation between the groups were introduced in Stage 3, however, friction was reduced, showing that the negative attitudes created by competition could be reversed through shared goals that needed the boys to work together, share responsibilities and agree on how to solve problems.

Question 13

why is Tajfel et al. (1970) important to research into prejudice?

Answer 13

Tajfel et al., (1970) found that people tend to show in-group favouritism when allocating resources, even when there is no history or competition between the two groups.

The large majority of the boys in experiment 1 gave more money to members of their own in-group than to boys in the other group, when they were making in-group/out-group decisions (average score 9 out of 14). They were much fairer in their allocations when decisions were in-group/in-group or out-group/out-group (average score 7.5).

In experiment 2, The Klee and Kandinsky study Tajfel et al. (1970) found that the boys made decisions that maximised in-group profit and maximum difference in favour of the in-group. If they had a choice between maximum profit for all and maximum profit for their in-group, they acted on behalf of their own group, giving more to their own even if giving more to the other group did not mean giving less to their own group.

Question 14

What are the aims of Tajfel et al. (1970): the study of minimal groups?

Answer 14

To test the idea that prejudice and discrimination can occur between groups without there being history between them or element of competition. Having found this, they then wanted to look at factors causing prejudice and discrimination (which is why it was important to have an experimental situation where actual behaviour was involved so one group had to act in relation to another group)

Question 15

What were the participants of Tajfel et al. (1970): the study of minimal groups?

Answer 15

64 boys aged 14-15yrs from a comprehensive school in Bristol

Question 16

What was the procedure for the Dot Experiment in Tajfel et al. (1970)?

Answer 16

This experiment looked at judgements as to how many dots were in a scene.

There were eight groups of eight boys (64) aged 14-15 year from a comprehensive school in Bristol. They were divided into groups in a laboratory and the boys knew each other well as they were in the same form and same school house.

First in-group categorisation (group formations) was established and an assessment conducted on how this may have affected their behaviour.

The boys were told that this was a ‘visual judgement’ study in a lecture room, and that they had to estimate and record their gesso na sheet of how many dots seen (there were 40 clusters of varying numbers of dots. There were two conditions:

Told people consistently overestimate or underestimate

Told some people were more accurate than others → Then their judgements were ‘scored’ and the boys were asked to help the researcher with something else.

The boys were told they were put into groups according to their judgements but in reality, they were allocated randomly. The tasks were for the boys to assign rewards and punishments in the form of real money, knowing code numbers for the rest of the boys and their subsequent groups. They were also shown matrixes with two rows of fourteen with both positive (added) and negative (taken away) numbers.

They could not allocate the money to themselves, and were repeatedly told “these are the rewards and punishments of Member X of your or the other group”.

The important part was that by doing this reward or punishment scheme, the boys were faced with three decisions:
In-group or In-group
In-group or Out-group
Out-group or Out-group
If they allocated the most amount of money, it was a score of 14 and if they were allocated the least, they were given a score of 1. An equal decision would give a score of 7.

Question 17

What was the procedure for the Klee and Kandinsky experiment in Tajfel et al. (1970)?

Answer 17

Maximum joint profit did not sway decisions as the other two conditions worked against this. They always acted on behalf of their own group → they always gave more money to their own

Question 18

What were the conclusions of both the dot experiments and the klee kandinsky experiment?

Answer 18

Outgroup discrimination is present and easily triggered
There is no need for intense competition → this goes against Sherif’s Realistic Conflict Theory

Discrimination starts from social categorisation
People act with the knowledge of their social norms e.g. ‘groupness’ and ‘fairness’ although ‘fairness’ may be overridden in favour of ‘groupness’ in real life
School teams are not a good idea considering the possible discriminatory side effects

Question 19

What is the generalizability strengths and weaknesses for Tajfel et al. (1970)?

Answer 19

Laboratory setting means this lacks ecological validity

Question 20

What is the reliability strengths and weaknesses for Tajfel et al. (1970)?

Answer 20

Large amounts of boys and trials meant that the findings were similar and reliable

Question 21

What is the objectivity strengths and weaknesses for Tajfel et al. (1970)?

Answer 21

Used controls, meaning it was easier to draw cause-and-effect conclusions → randomly assigned groups that made sense to the boys, matrices etc.

Question 22

What are the validity strengths and weaknesses for Tajfel et al. (1970)?

Answer 22

Minimal groups → boys did not see the importance of the `tasks as they are already a part of a group, and so this lacks validity

Question 23

what are the factors of personality associated/affecting prejudice?

Answer 23

social dominance orientation (SDO) and right wing authoritarianism (RWA)

Question 24

who looked at individual differences in prejudice?

Answer 24

Cohrs et al. (2012) and found links between rwa and prejudice

Question 25

what are the ‘big five’?

Answer 25

neuroticism, extraversion, conscientiousness, openness and agreeableness

Question 26

What did Cohrs et al. (2012) find relating to personality and prejudice?

Answer 26

Recent studies such as Cohrs et al. (2012) show personality dimensions do not link with prejudice directly, but underpin ideological attitudes e.g. R.W.A and S..D.O and these ideological attitudes underpin prejudice although Cohrs et al. (2012) does show that personality dimensions can directly link to prejudice.