Transcript Slide 1
Stereotyping, Prejudice, and Discrimination Lecture Outline Components of intergroup bias Theories of prejudice and discrimination cognitive, realistic conflict, motivational, cultural, evolutionary Consequences: Stereotype threat Strategies of overcoming prejudice and discrimination The ABC of Intergroup Bias Stereotypes (Cognition) beliefs about attributes that are thought to be characteristic of members of particular groups Prejudice (Affect) a negative attitude or affective response toward a certain group and its individual members Discrimination (Behaviour) negative behaviour towards members of a particular group based on their membership in that group The Cognitive Perspective Emphasizes the cognitive processes that produce and maintain stereotypes, and how stereotypes in turn affect prejudice and discrimination The Cognitive Perspective implicit (automatic) processes – explicit (controlled) processes - Implicit and Explicit Stereotypes and Prejudice 1) Explicit Attitudes: what people consciously endorse or believe 2) Implicit Attitudes: associations that are outside of conscious awareness a. Implicit Association Test (IAT) b. Priming and Implicit Prejudice Implicit and Explicit Stereotypes and Prejudice If I an E are different, which one is the “true” attitude? Better question: Implicit attitudes Explicit attitudes On misperceiving a weapon (Payne, 2001) 200 ms OR OR Decision: Weapon or tool? .5 second 200 ms Realistic Group Conflict Theory group conflict, prejudice, and discrimination are likely to arise over competition between groups for limited desired resources Correlation between cotton prices and # of lynchings of Blacks in US South Cotton Prices # of Lynchings Similar pattern for unemployment rate and opposition to immigration in Canada Realistic Conflict Theory The Robber’s Cave Experiment (Sherif et al. 1961) a. Competition and Intergroup Conflict b. Reducing Intergroup Conflict via Superordinate Goals superordinate goals – Example: “Earthquake diplomacy” Evaluating RCT Minimal Group Experiments Participants are assigned to groups on meaningless criteria Then they are given the opportunity to distribute resources (e.g., money) Participants show ingroup favoritism! Cannot be explained by RCT We need a motivational perspective The Motivational Perspective Prejudice and discrimination can be a tool to boost our self-esteem and repair perceived threats to our self-esteem The Motivational Perspective Social Identity Theory a person’s self-concept and self-esteem not only derive from personal identity and accomplishments, but from the status and accomplishments of the various groups to which the person belongs After negative personal feedback, ppts derogate outgroups (A), which restores their self-esteem (B) (Fein & Spencer, 1997) Just World Beliefs:The dilemma of the innocent victim •JWB •Injustice in the world is a perceived threat •Outcomes reflect personal traits – more FAE •One pernicious consequence: blaming victims Just World Beliefs (Lerner & Miller, 1978) Just-world beliefs “By and large, people deserve what they get in life” “Basically, the world is a just place” “People who do their job will rise to the top” “People who meet with misfortune have often brought it on themselves” Just World Beliefs Blaming the victim—experiments by Lerner & colleagues Just World Beliefs Victim blaming is less likely Who believes in a just world? Just World Beliefs: Summary & Clarifications When one believes in just world AND the victim cannot be helped = MORE victim blaming Not about self helping victim (empathy) Not about perceived competence of the victim (VB even when victim is “randomly assigned” to be a victim) Belief systems to rationalize inequality & discrimination System justification (Jost et al, 2004) Social Dominance Orientation (Sidanius & Pratto) Belief that their own groups are “destined” to dominate other less worthy, groups Members of more privileged groups endorse SDO more High SDO scores predict overt prejudice and more stereotyping towards lower-status groups Distal Explanations of prejudice and discrimination Evolutionary account #1 Innate tendency for “us vs. them thinking” or coalitional psychology Intergoup psychology evolved (in ancestral times)– small cohesive, mutually hostile bands But what counts as ingroup vs. outgroup is flexible, socially constructed Explains why bases of discrimination is radically different across time and place, but us-them mentality is so resilient Distal Explanations of prejudice and discrimination Evolutionary account #2 Intergoup psychology is misapplication of our innate understanding of species with “essences” We tend to think of different social groups as if they are different biological species Explains why many social categories are essentialized And why the more essentialized, the easier to stereotype Distal Explanations of prejudice and discrimination Cultural account Cultural dissimilarity breeds dislike Brewer & Campbell (1976): study of intercultural attitudes • 30 East African societies in in Uganda, Kenya, and Tanzania • Measures of cultural similarity, familiarity, liking, and personality traits • People felt the most positive towards groups that: (1) Were geographically nearer (2) Culturally most similar to themselves Being a Member of a Stigmatized Group 1. Stereotype Threat - fear that one will confirm the stereotypes that others have regarding some salient group of which on is a member Stereotype Threat in Intellectual Abilities ST can occur for any social group for which there is a negative stereotype on a skill Stereotype Threat in Intellectual Abilities African Americans and intellectual abilities Women and math White men and athletic abilities Etc. Stereotype Threat Stereotype Threat Slide 25 of 28 Stereotype threat vs. boost (Shih, Pittinski & Ambady, 1999 Reducing Stereotype Threat in Educational Settings Developing awareness Communicating (and having) high expectations Social support Positive role models Reducing prejudice and conflict Superordinate goals Superordinate identity Equal status contact Perceived similarity between groups Multiculturalism