Social approach - Prejudice Flashcards
1
Q
AO1 points on Social Identity Theory
A
- Developed by Tajfel, opposes Realistic Conflict Theory
- SIT says people get their self esteem from the groups we identify with i.e. our ingroups. They also tend to have negative views about some other groups i.e. outgroups.
- SIT proposes group formation goes through 3 phases:-
1) Social Categorisation: Seeing yourself as part of a social group as well as your own personal identity. This is your social identity and can involve belonging to groups based on race, religion, friends, sports, social class etc.
2) Social Identification: Once you have a social identity, you perceive everyone else you meet as either your ingroup or your outgroup. You pay particular attention to ingroup members and try to adopt their behaviours, appearances and values.
3) Social Comparison: When you view your own social identity as superior to other groups in order to increase your own self esteem. This can lead to hostility and prejudice towards other groups and even discrimination if you have the power to influence them. - SIT argues that self esteem is at the core of social identity as we need to feel good about ourselves to feel good about the groups we belong to.
- However not everyone identifies with their ingroup to the same extent and there may be personality variable like Adornos authoritarian personality in this case being people who get their self esteem from social groups instead of personal identity.
- Social Comparison does not happen with outgroups who you may never meet or are irrelevant in your life.
2
Q
AO2 Application points on Social Identity Theory
A
- SIT can be seen in schools such as in groups of friends called cliques. These groups overvalue their own in group and look down on outgroups (wearing stylish clothes, how popular they are etc.) as their own self esteem is based on the status of their social group.
- Football fans behave similarly, as if you support a certain team your self esteem is linked to the success of the team. If the team wins it boosts self esteem and if it loses, you can feel good by believing fans of other team are inferior to you. They show social identification by wearing team colours, singing chants etc.
- ideally people should develop a self esteem based on their personal identity separate from social identity so that they don’t have to look down on others.
- Social Identity is a perception and not a fact as you only belong to the groups you think you belong to. One way of preventing prejudice is by getting people to expand their sense of social identity. If people see themselves as part of a bigger ingroup, then social comparison will stop.
- Sometimes members of two groups can put their differences aside and unite against another outgroup e.g. wars.
3
Q
AO3 Evaluation points on Social Identity Theory (Credibility)
A
- SIT is supported by Tajfel’s studies into minimalists groups. The research showed that boys will discriminate against an outgroup (even one with their own friends) and show ingroup bias (even if it contains strangers) and this will happen even if the group identity is based of Kandinsky or Klee.
- SIT provides an explanation for why discrimination occurs even when the outgroup is not a threat to the ingroup and there is no competition over resources. If self esteem is based on social identity then some groups need to put down outgroups in order to feel good about themselves
4
Q
AO3 Evaluation points on Social Identity Theory (Objections)
A
- Tajfel’s minimalist group studies have been criticised for using artificial tasks that lack ecological validity, however, Tajfel argues that if boys will be prejudiced over trivial tasks like this they will be more likely to discriminate over more serious issues as well.
- Another criticism of these studies is that adolescent boys are naturally competitive and the matrices looked like a competition of some sort and the boys may have assumed Tajfel wanted them to win at this “game” due to demand characteristics.
- There are gaps in the theory itself such as why some people cling to their self esteem more than others. Adornos authoritarian personality theory might be a better alternative explanation.
5
Q
AO3 Evaluation points on Social Identity Theory (Differences)
A
- Sheriff’s RCT stands in to contrast SIT as it explains that prejudice occurs between ingroups and outgroups when there is a scarcity of resources like food, money, jobs and status.
- RCT is backed up by Sherriff’s Robber cave study where boys showed outgroup discrimination when a tournament was arranged between them. It started with name calling and food fights but became increasingly violent.
- As with Tajfel’s minimalist group studies, this study of schoolboys may not generalise to adult behaviour and unlike the minimalist studies, boys fighting at a summer camp has a lot more ecological validity than ticking books of matrices.
6
Q
AO3 Evaluation points on Social Identity Theory (Applications)
A
- Strategies that increase peoples sense of personal identity may reduce prejudice, especially if they raise self esteem at the same time. Counselling can be a way of doing this.
- Encouraging people to see themselves as part of a larger social identity can combat outgroup discrimination. Some people think teaching “Britishness” in schools may reduce conflict between groups, if they all see themselves as British citizens. However, this may backfire if it leads to more conflict with people who are seen as “un-British”.
- Religion can bring together people of many nationalities and backgrounds and may give people a feeling of self worth however, it can also create a high sense of social identity which can lead to the worst kind of prejudice.
7
Q
AO1/AO3 points for Tajfel’s study on Social Identity Theory
A
- Tajfel recruited Bristol schoolboys aged 14-15 and divided them into minimal groups. In one study, this was done by showing them dots on a screen and telling some boys they had over-estimated and others they had under-estimated the number of dots.
- In another, Tajfel showed the boys paintings by the artists Paul Klee and Wassily Kandinsky, then telling some boys they had shown preference for one, some boys the other. The boys were assigned to groups randomly but they were not told this.
- The boys were given the task of assigning points from a book of tables i.e. matrices.
- Each matrix offered different allocations of points to a pair of anonymous boys. The points converted into money, 10 points became 1 pence. But the boys didn’t know which people they were giving points to.
- The boys would be fair if they were allocating points to two outgroup members or two ingroup members. However, if allocating to an ingroup and an outgroup member, they awarded more points/money to boys in their own group showing ingroup favoritism.
- If the boys had to chose between maximum joint profit and maximum difference they would chose maximum difference even if it meant awarding their ingroup less than the maximum ingroup profit would have done. In other words, they would shortchange their ingroup, so long as it gave them an opportunity to do better than the outgroup.
- Tajfel concludes that outgroup discrimination is easily triggered as just perceiving someone else to be in an outgroup is enough to do it.
- There was no need for the boys to be in competition as they chose competitive options even when the matrices gave them fair options as well.
- The boys would choose fair splits of points some of the time, but Tajfel suggests this is less likely to happen when the groups are not “minimal groups” and are based on something more important than counting dots or liking artists.
8
Q
AO1 points on Realistic Conflict Theory
A
- Theory developed by Sherif, opposes SIT.
- RLC states that whenever there are two or more groups that are seeking the same limited resources, this will lead to conflict, negative stereotypes and discrimination between the groups.
- Conflict, negative stereotypes and beliefs, and discrimination between groups can be reduced in situations where two or more groups are seeking to obtain some superordinate goals.
- Superordinate goals are mutually-desirable goals that cannot be obtained without the participation of two or more groups.
- It isn’t important that there should be actual conflicts over resources so much as perceived conflict. For e.g. there are people with prejudice against immigrants because they believe “they are coming over here to take our jobs”. This is quite separate from whether immigrants actually do take jobs that British workers want. Immigrants might take jobs like fruit-picking that British workers don’t want to do.
- Another related idea is the Zero-Sum Fate. This is the idea that if one side gains, someone else has to lose out. Some times this might be true, but not always. Realistic Conflict occurs when people believe that an out group can only benefit at their expense. So, if they see out group members doing well, they conclude that they must be losing out somehow.
- The Michigan National Election Studies survey gathered data on attitudes towards a government plan to merge schools and bus white children to schools alongside black children. In these surveys, white respondents opposed the idea of their children being schooled alongside African Americans. RCT would say this is because the white families felt that the privilege they enjoyed (wealth, better education, better career prospects) would be threatened if they had to share it with the children of black families.
- John Duckitt argues there are two types of realistic conflict, depending on whether or not the two groups have equal power. Standard Realistic Conflict is between two “peer groups” who are equal but competing. Sometimes an ingroup will be in conflict with an outgroup that has low status and isn’t a real threat. This is “domination of the outgroup by the ingroup”. The dominated group might accept their inferior status or might resent it. The powerful ingroup decides whether the rebellion is unjustified (leading to prejudice) or justified (leading to social change).
9
Q
AO2 Application points on Realistic Conflict Theory
A
Cooperation between groups:-
- If conflict arises due to scarce resources, it decreases when cooperation is shown, which results in more shared resources. To reduce prejudice, superordinate goals can be set up. This is where the resources can only be won if the groups cooperate rather than compete.
- Sherif demonstrated the power of superordinate goals to reduce conflict in the “Robbers Cave” study. When the Eagles and the Rattlers had to work together to fix a water pipe and choose movies to watch, the hostility between the groups lessened.
Challenging perceptions:-
- Quite often, people perceive a competition over scarce resources when really there’s enough to go round. For example, because of falling birth rates and an ageing population, most European countries need immigrants to come and do jobs and pay taxes as there are too many jobs that need doing, not too few.
- Gordon Allport proposed the Contact Hypothesis, which says that the more contact people have with outgroups, the more their prejudices will be reduced. This is called the “reconceptualization of group categories”. Allport agrees with Sherif that the groups must work together towards superordinate goals, but also with Duckitt that the groups need to have equal status when they meet.
- He adds that there needs to be personal contact between the groups i.e. they have to mingle and get to know each other to challenge stereotypes. Another factor is the support of the authorities for the meeting so you can’t have authority figures opposing the contact.
10
Q
AO3 Evaluation points on Realistic Conflict Theory (Credibility)
A
- There’s a lot of research in support of Realistic Conflict, especially the “Robbers Cave” study and also a lot of attitude surveys like the Michigan National Election Studies. It is also backed up by common sense (face validity). Football fans tend to have negative stereotypes about rival teams, but no particular view about teams much lower (or higher) in the league that aren’t in competition with their team.
- Extremists who try to whip up prejudice often claim that outgroups represent a threat to people’s jobs, education, money or privileges. In other words, they try to create a perception (which may not be true) that resources are scarce and the outgroup are competitors. This is exactly what RCT would predict.
11
Q
AO3 Evaluation points on Realistic Conflict Theory (Objections)
A
- The “Robbers Cave” study was carried out on American schoolboys, not on adults. Testosterone and upbringing might make schoolboys especially likely to form tribes and be competitive. There’s a danger in generalising from them to adult behaviour.
- Attitude surveys suffer from a circular argument problem of validity. Which comes first, the prejudice or the perception of competition? Bigoted people will often create the idea of competition to justify their prejudices, but the prejudices may in fact come first. This is the insight from Social Identity Theory.
12
Q
AO3 Evaluation points on Realistic Conflict Theory (Differences)
A
- Tajfel’s SIT stands in stark contrast to RCT which claims that prejudice is natural and instinctive and happens immediately, as soon as you categorise yourself as belonging to an ingroup (social categorisation) and notice other people belonging to an outgroup (social comparison). This prejudice has nothing to do with competition over resources.
- SIT is backed up by Tajfel’s “Minimal Group” studies where boys showed outgroup discrimination even though they weren’t in competition with the outgroup. They would choose options from the matrix booklets that offered scarce resources (in points) in order to create competition rather than the options that would give their ingroup more points.
- On the other hand, “Robbers Cave” was a study of schoolboys that may not generalise to adult behaviour. Unlike “Robbers Cave”, assigning points from matrix booklets was deeply artificial and may lack ecological validity.
- There are other theories that explain prejudice as well. Adorno argues that some people have an “Authoritarian Personality” that is threatened by people who are different and enjoys disciminating against outgroups that have less status.
- Adorno’s research involved questionnaires (the “Fascism Scale”) and interviews to get quantitative and qualitative data. Again, this is a theory that suggests groups do not need competition in order for prejudices to form.
13
Q
AO3 Evaluation points on Realistic Conflict Theory (Applications)
A
- The idea of superordinate goals has a clear application for reducing prejudice and discrimination. The ingroup and outgroup need to work together towards something that is valued by both of them; then they see each other as members of the one group, with a shared goal of achieving resources through cooperation. This is how Sherif defused prejudice in “Robbers Cave”.
- Allport’s Contact Hypothesis applies here, because prejudice will be reduced if group members get to mingle freely with the outgroup and question their own stereotypes. It is important that leaders and authority figures support this mingling.
- This is the base of multicultural education that brings children into contact with other children of different ethnicity. Schools often have days where they celebrate the religion, food and dress of minorities.
