Sources of Prejudice Flashcards
minimal groups paradigm
people are very quick to form groups, and can easily discriminate others on the basis of simply being apart of the group
three components of attitude
affect, behaviour cognition
affect
goes with prejudice
- how you feel towards someone
behaviour
goes with discrimination
- how you behave towards someone
cognition
goes with stereotypes
- how you think about someone who is a member of a group
- beliefs you have towards someone, can be automatic or deliberate
stereotypes
beliefs that certain attributes are characteristics of members of that particular group
* can be positive or negative
* stereotypes are applied too broadly
* causes people to make claims of over simplification
schemas that we have for members of certain groups
apart of shared cultural knowledge, informally taught in families
- positive stereotypes can have negative effects
where do stereotypes come from? (4)
culture
what we learn at home
media
social groups
old fashioned racism
outright, explicit prejudice and discrimination
still a problem
modern racism
belief system that has three main tenants
- denial that there is continuing discrimination
- resentment about the demands that disadvantaged groups make for equal treatment
- resentment about concessions made to disadvantaged groups
- “I don’t see race”, “we’ve solved racism”
- think that everyone is equally advantaged
Shoving study
white person shoved black person
– 13% say it was aggressive
black person shoves white person
– 73% say it was aggressive
- example of modern racism
aversive racism
another subtle form of racism
individuals will state that they have egalitarian views and accordingly will not be overtly discriminatory
– but still feel discomfort with members of racial minority groups
behavioural consequences: avoidance of out group members, anxiety & overcorrection, subtle discrimination
* might avoid specific groups
aversive racism and hiring decisions
participants (all white) rated resumes that included a picture of a black or white candidate
- when applications were strong, no difference in rate
- when resumes were moderate, see aversive racism because the exact same applications will be chosen more from white people
so, with ambiguous situations, race factors into decisions
why trying not to be awkward makes you awkward
aversive racism causes people to be really awkward towards outgrips
ironic because trying to look normal and not racist, causes you to act anything but normal
alleviate this by acknowledging your anxiety to alleviate the awkwardness
institutional/systemic racism
the differential access to the good, services, and opportunities of society by group status
hides as other factors (neighbourhood, income, education) but propagates and thus becomes very difficult to rectify
ex: laws that say its okay to separate migrant kids from their families
ex: laws that say that black women have a higher pain tolerance and don’t need as much pain medication at hospitals
when institutions set policies that give different access to resources, it can create systemic racism
aversive racism can bleed into racism and norms
example of systemic racism
in Detroit very segregated because of systemic racism
– black people living in inner city because affordable
– creates institutional racism
– white people uncomfortable living close to black people so move to outskirts and causes segregation
schooling
– schools are funded locally, so schools in black neighbourhood are poorer so get less funding and worse education
– rich white children who live in rich neighbourhood have better funded schools = better education
– this is racism masking itself in neighbourhoods and property taxes
example of systemic racism
soap dispenser is made to sense white hands, so soap isn’t dispensed on a black person’s hand
happens because of a lack of diversity in tech
* if everyone creating the product is white, won’t think about inclusion of black people
another problem of not having diversity on teams
Male nasa engineers sent Sally to space with 100 tampons
they said they wanted to be safe
highlights problem of not having diversity on your team
ambivalent sexism
hostile and benevolent sexism items
hostile sexism items
- women fail to appreciate what men do for them
- women seek to gain power by getting control over men
- most women interpret innocent remarks or act as being sexist
hostile = old fashioned sexism
benevolent sexism items
- women should be cherished and protected by men
- many women have a quality of purity that few men possess
- a good woman out to be set on a pedestal by her man
ambivalent sexism
hostile and benevolent sexism tend to be positively correlated
* as one goes up, the other goes up
* when they agree with hostile, they agree with benevolent
* so people that agree with positive ideas also agree with negative ideas
people who score high on benevolent sexism don’t really recognize that they hold stereotypes towards women
positive stereotypes can have negative effects and are a big oversimplification
* idea that women need to be protected - they need a man who is the powerful one
how does hostile and benevolent sexism predict discrimination
hostile sexism - sexual harassment and inter partner violence
benevolent sexism - decreases women’s confidence and performance in the workplace, encourages subordination
causes of stereotypes and prejudice
– economic perspectives
– motivational perspectives
– cognitive perspectives
economic perspectives
realistic conflict theory
* hostility between groups is caused by direct competition for limited resources
- resources can be real or not
- perception of competition can be enough to have conflict
says that competition for resources is the causal agent behind intergroup discrimination, stereotypes and prejudice
correlational problems: how do we know if limited resources causes prejudice or other way around
theory claims that conflict creates prejudice
the robbers cave experiment
designed to test if creating conflict between groups also creates prejudice
two groups bonded and created their own cultures
competition stage where they compete against each other and loser doesn’t get a prize (limited resources - realistic conflict theory)
kids had prejudices against the other group
showed that conflict for resources resulted in prejudice for attitudes and discriminatory behaviour
how to eliminate these behaviours: simple co-existence doesn’t work – doing tasks where they have to work together to solve issues did
how to reduce conflict: through superordinate goals
motivational perspective
motivations for self esteem and to enhance our self worth can create stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination
motivational perspectives - social identity theory
A person’s sense of who they are based their group membership(s)
people favour in-groups over out-groups to enhance their own self esteem
– self esteem is strengthened by belonging to favourable groups
SIT says that discrimination and prejudice can result from our motivation to feel smart and capable and to make good decisions on the social groups that we are apart of which makes us favour them more and views other groups more negatively
all you need to discriminate is self esteem and a motive to feel good about your own choices
diminishing out-groups boosts self esteem
has to do with cognitive dissonance
all driven by the need to justify your choices
motivated to feel confident in our choice of groups
what does group membership do
makes you view your group more favourably
makes you view out-groups more negatively
both boosts self esteem and confidence
in-group bias
tendency to favour one’s group (the in-group)
in-group/out-group distinctions can affect our self esteem
self esteem is a mechanism that causes people to derogate out-groups bc that will boost their self esteem
Participants with negative feedback on their intelligence will rate out-groups more negatively to boost their self esteem
those with positive feedback rate in-group and out-group members similarily
causes of stereotypes - cognitive perspectives
cognitive misers
illusory correlations
cognitive misers
says that we have stereotypes because we are human misers
Miser: tendency for humans to think and solve problems in the most simple and least effortful way
S1 (quick intuitions) may be responsible for the stereotypes that we have
* we all have schemas for groups and stereotypes
– so stereotypes should help us to remember things more easily
cognitive misers and schemas
stereotypes either are schemas or operate similarly to schemas
sets of information stored in our memory that help us remember info about the schema
also frees up attentional processing so we can pay attention to other things
– stereotypes are a product of normal human thinking because brains are wired to organize info into schemas and stereotypes are schemas of people
illusory correlation
distinctive events capture attention bc more likely to be remembered and may be over-represented in memory
causes stereotypes because members of minority groups are distinctive because they are infrequent
* negative events are also distinctive
* so people are very likely to note negative behaviours by minority members
* reinforces stereotype that minority groups are more likely to do negative things
what makes an event distinctive? (2)
- when it is infrequent
- when it is something that is counter-normative
