Sociocultural (Individual and the Group) Studies

Question 1

Tajfel

Answer 1

Aim:
- investigate if intergroup discrimination would take place in a minimal group paradigm (what are the minimal conditions needed for ingroup favoritism to occur)

Procedure:
- 48 14-year-old boys in England placed in groups based off art preferences
- told to give money to other subjects based off group membership
1) points split evenly between groups
2) ingroup gets largest amount, indifferent to what outgroup gets
3) outgroup gets the smallest amount even if it limits what ingroup gets

Results and Conclusions:
- majority chose 3rd option
- created positive distinctiveness (giving their ingroup something to make them ‘better’ than outgroup)
- supports SIT and that people will favor ingroup even if groups are chosen for arbitrary reasons

Strengths and Limitations:
- controlled with minimal confounding variables
- highly artificial, lacks ecological validity
- may have shown demand characteristics
- replicable and reliable
- sampling bias (WEIRD)

Question 2

Park and Rothbart

Answer 2

Aim:
- support outgroup homogeneity explanation of stereotype formation

Procedure:
- 3 sororities at American university that were similar in proximity and values
- 90 participants (30 from each sorority) given questionnaires ranking their own sorority and an outgroup sorority on ten dimensions (attractiveness, sexual activity, study habits, etc.)
- rank their own and the others on a likert scale

Results and Conclusions:
- measured their sororities more favorably than the others (ingroup bias)
- rated their ingroup as more unique and outgroups as more similar (outgroup homogeneity)
- favorable dimensions were ranked higher in ingroups than outgroups (ingroup bias)

Strengths and Limitations:
- specific example of stereotypes, results may or may not carry over to other things
- limited generalizability
- correlation study, cannot show cause-and-effect relationship or account for confounding variables
- real-world example of SIT and stereotype formation

Question 3

Bandura

Answer 3

Aim:
- demonstrate that learning can occur through observation, and imitation when given the opportunity

Procedure:
36 boys and 36 girls aged 3-6
divided into three groups: aggressive model, non-aggressive model, no model
each group divided in half with each gender to see same-sex model and opposite-sex model
IV - behavior of model, gender of model, gender of child
DV - amount of imitation, verbal and physical aggression

Results and Conclusions:
- those exposed to aggressive models showed more aggressive acts
- boys more physically aggressive and girls more verbally aggressive
- more replication of same-sex models
- learning and replication of behavior after short period of time of observation
- gender stereotypes could have reduced female aggression

Strengths and Limitations:
- matched pairs design controlled for pre-existing aggression
- small sample and bias, limits generalizability
- ethically problemative

Question 4

Shih, Pattinsky, and Ambady

Answer 4

Aim:
- investigate possibility of stereotypes having potential positive and negative effects on behavior

Procedure:
- 46 Asian-American female students
- randomly allocated into three conditions (Asian-identity, gender-identity, and control)
- one identity made more salient through prior questionnaire (Asian: language they speak, generation of immigration; Female: roommates, dorm life; Control: phone service, television)
- given challenging math test scored for accuracy

Results and Conclusions:
- those with Asian-identity salience performed the best, followed by the control, and gender salient condition scoring the lowest
- suggests that positive stereotypes can have a positive effect on performance, supporting stereotype-threat ideas

Strengths and Limitations:
- smaller sample size
- no guarantee of subject’s familiarity with these stereotypes or that they were more salient

Question 5

Martin and Halvorson

Answer 5

Aim:
- to determine if pre-existing gender schemas will distort memories that are inconsistent with these schemas

Procedure:
- 24 girls and 24 boys aged 5-6
- shown 16 pictures of a person doing an activity (half gender congruent and half gender incongruent)
- children divided based on their knowledge of gender stereotypes
- each picture shown for about 10 minutes and then children were asked to indicate their confidence of their memories
- a week later they were assessed again and asked which gender was completing the specific activity

Results and Conclusions:
- significantly more reversals of gender in the schema-inconsistent images
- kids had the same confidence in gender swapped images as the accurate answers
- pre-existing stereotypes distorted the children’s memories of the gender incongruent images
- reversed gender to confirm their stereotypes

Strenghts and Limitations:
- extremely controlled
- replicable and reliable
- sample bias means no generalizability outside of American culture

Question 6

Hilliard and Liben

Answer 6

Aim:
- determine how social category salience (gender) may play a role in the development of stereotypes and intergroup behavior

Procedure:
- 2 similar preschools with gender-neutral policies
- pre-test/post-test design
- pre-test measured pre-existing gender stereotypes, children presented with feminine, masculine, and neutral activities and asked who should do them
- measured the amount of “both” responses as well as time spent playing with opposite-sex peers
- randomly allocated to high-salience (gendered language and separation) and low-salience (no change, control) conditions

Results and Conclusions:
- high-salience condition decreased amount of “both” responses as well as time spent with opposite sex
- low-salience condition saw no significant changes
- suggests that gender stereotypes were increased when gender made more salient
- this caused more generalized characteristics of groups (outgroup homogeneity)

Strenghts and Limitations:
- field experiment, high ecological validity but low internal validity
- sampling bias
- cause-and-effect relationship but hard to measure salience degrees in each child
- ethical considerations of stereotypes

Question 7

Gergely, Bekkering, and Kiraly

Answer 7

Aim:
- demonstrate that observational learning and imitation is not automatic, but a rational process

Procedure:
- 27 infants watched an adult turn on a touch-lamp with their foreheads
- half of the models had their hands occupied, half had their hands free and could have used them
- a week later, infants were given time with the light to turn it on

Results and Conclusions:
- significantly more children that observed the hands-free model used their foreheads to turn on the light
- this suggests that children determined the reasoning to use either head or hands (if hands were free, there must be some benefit to using forehead if adult did. if hands were occupied, then it makes sense for child to use their free hands)
- suggests that if a model shows consistency of behavior across circumstances then the behavior will increase replication of behavior

Strengths and Limitations:
- children were not verbal and could not explain thought process
- low ecological validity

Question 8

Hamilton and Gifford

Answer 8

Aim:
- determine the relationship between group size and degree to which subjects stereotype the groups (illusory correlation of group size and negative behavior)

Procedure:
- 20 male and 20 female college students
- told researchers were studying how people process visual information
- asked participants to read descriptions of two made-up groups (A and B) with an equal ratio of positive and negative behaviors
- group A had twice as many members than B
- subjects asked to rate traits for the groups on a scale of 1-10 and asked to attribute to either group A or B

Results and Conclusions:
- although there was no correlation between group membership and behavior, participants seemed to form an illusory correlation
- more negative traits attributed to group B even though there were less negative statements
- group B had numerically less members and negative behaviors, making it more distinctive than group A and causing illusory correlation
- seeing members of a minority behave a certain way could lead to stereotyping of full group

Strengths and Limitations:
- highly artificial, real stereotypes are more engrained in people
- low ecological validity
- applicable, can explain why negative stereotypes may be more common in minority groups
- suggests stigmatized patients suffer more from illusory correlation bias than non-stigmatized patients in medicinal practices