Download - Prejudice and techniques

A/R. Reference: Pearson Education Inc.

ChapterChapter

Prejudice: Prejudice:

Causes and CuresCauses and Cures


Chapter OutlineChapter Outline

I. Prejudice: The Ubiquitous Social Phenomenon


Prejudice: The Ubiquitous Social Prejudice: The Ubiquitous Social PhenomenonPhenomenon

Prejudice is extremely powerful and ubiquitous; it affects all of us—majority group members as well as minority.

Prejudice is dangerous, fostering negative consequences from lowered self-esteem to torture, murder, and genocide.

Although over the past 50 years blatant discrimination has been reduced, it still exists in subtle—and sometimes not-so-subtle—forms.



II. Prejudice, Stereotyping, and Discrimination Defined


Prejudice, Stereotyping and Discrimination Prejudice, Stereotyping and Discrimination DefinedDefined

Prejudice

Prejudice is an attitude. It has the three components of attitudes: i) affective, ii) cognitive, and iii) behavioural.

Prejudice is a hostile or negative attitude toward a distinguishable group of people, based solely on their membership in that group.


Prejudice, Stereotyping & Discrimination Prejudice, Stereotyping & Discrimination DefinedDefined

Prejudice: The Affective Component

The affective component is the emotion (e.g., anger, warmth) associated with the attitude object.

Although prejudice refers to either positive or negative affect, people usually reserve the word ‘prejudice’ for use only when it refers to negative attitudes about others.



Stereotyping: The Cognitive Component

The cognitive component is our beliefs and thoughts (cognitions) about the target of prejudice. It involves stereotyping.

A stereotype is a generalization about a group of people in which identical characteristics are assigned to virtually all members of the group, regardless of actual variation among the members.



Discrimination: The behavioural Component

The behavioural component of prejudice refers to the actions, or behaviour, associated with the prejudiced object, such as discrimination.

Discrimination is an unjustified, negative, or harmful action towards a member of a group, simply because of his or her membership in that group.

Stereotypic beliefs (prejudice) can result in unfair treatment (see Bond et al, 1988, mental hospital study; Fig. 13.1; also Page, 1998, 1999).



III. What Causes Prejudice?


What Causes Prejudice?What Causes Prejudice?

What makes people prejudiced? Is it inherited, or is it learned? Possibly both.

Prejudice could be an essential part of our biological survival mechanism inducing us to favour our own family, tribe, or race and to express hostility toward outsiders.

Or, our culture (parents, community, media) might intentionally, or unintentionally, instruct us to assign negative qualities and attributes to people who are different from us.

No one knows.

What is known is that the specifics of prejudice must be learned. How does this happen?



The Way We Think: Social Cognition

One way prejudice is learned is as a byproduct of the way we process and organize information—all of the negative aspects of social cognition can lead us to form negative stereotypes and to apply them in a discriminatory fashion.

In other words, prejudice is the inevitable byproduct of categorization, schemas, heuristics, and faulty memory processes in processing information.




Schemas (stereotypes) we hold about certain groups influence the way we process information about them.

-eg, information consistent with our schemas will be given more attention, will be recalled more often, and will be remembered better than inconsistent information.

-eg, we also tend to fill in the blanks with schema-consistent information__to the anti-Negro person, negroes are musical, athletic, lazy, dumb, regardless of the obvious characteristics of the target person.




Schemas (stereotypes) are highly resistant to change__even in the face of contradictory evidence.

-eg, we explain away disconfirming evidence and thereby maintain our stereotypes, ‘Oh he’s an exception.’



Social Categorization: Us vs. Them

Another way prejudice is encouraged is through the in-group bias (the us-vs.-them).

An in-group is a group with which a person identifies and feels he/she is a member of; an out-group is a group with which a person does not identify.

In-group bias is the especially positive feelings and special treatment we reserve for people we have defined as part of our in-group.




Out-group members are seen as possessing negative traits and are often disliked.

This tendency to favour the in-group while denigrating the out-group is so pervasive that people show this bias even under the most minimal conditions (see Tajfel and colleagues, 1982).




Why do we show this tendency to favour the in-group while denigrating the out-group? Because,

i) Belonging to a group gives us social identity, and

ii) Having a social identity contributes to feelings of positive self-esteem.



Activation of Stereotypes

Research shows that derogatory comments can activate other negative, stereotypical beliefs about the target person (see Henderson-King & Nisbett, 1996).



Meta-Stereotypes

Recently, Vorauer et al (1998) raised the possibility that our level of prejudice depends not solely on whether our stereotype of a particular group is positive or negative, but also on whether we think members of that group ascribe to a positive or negative stereotype of us. This is referred to as a meta-stereotype.

A meta-stereotype is a person’s beliefs regarding the stereotype that out-group members hold about him/her.



Meta-Stereotypes

For example, studies show that white students at the University of Manitoba believed that Native Canadians perceive white Canadians as prejudiced, unfair, selfish, arrogant, wealthy, materialistic, phony, etc__a meta-stereotype.

Moreover, when white students were asked about their reaction to an anticipated interaction with Native students at U of M, the white students felt that they would experience negative emotions and would not enjoy the interaction very much.



The Way We Feel: Affect and Mood

Esses et al (1993) point out that there is more to prejudice than merely the attribution of stereotypes to groups.

Their research suggest that the emotions elicited by a particular group are important in determining our level of prejudice.

When we are in a good mood, we are likely to evaluate members of out-groups more favourably than when we are in a bad mood.



The Way We Feel: Affect and Mood

And, of all of the predictors of prejudice (emotion, stereotypes, symbolic beliefs, and behaviour), emotion is the strongest (Haddock et al, 1993).

Recent research by Corenblum and Stephan (2001) suggests that emotion is also a strong predictor of prejudice that minority groups feel toward majority groups.



IV. Individual Differences in Prejudice



V. Effects of Stereotyping, Prejudice, and Discrimination


Effects of Stereotyping, Prejudice and Effects of Stereotyping, Prejudice and DiscriminationDiscrimination

Self-Fulfilling Prophecies

Stereotyping, prejudice and discrimination can have devastating effects on their victims.

Research on self-fulfilling prophecies suggests that we may unknowingly create stereotypical behaviour in out-group members through our treatment of them.



VI. How Can Prejudice and Discrimination Be Reduced?


How Can Prejudice and Discrimination Be How Can Prejudice and Discrimination Be Reduced?Reduced?

‘It’s never too late to give up our prejudices.’ (Henry David Thoreau)

There are a number of ways prejudice can be reduced. Some have been mentioned:

i) Getting people to focus on positive aspects of themselves (self-affirmation) reduces the need to denigrate others in order to get a self-esteem boost.

ii) Blurring the distinction between ‘us’ and ‘them’ can improve attitudes toward out-groups.



Other strategies include:

iii) learning not to hate;

Iv) revising stereotypical beliefs;

v) The contact hypothesis;

vi) Cooperation and independence: the jigsaw classroom;

vii) The extended contact hypothesis



Learning Not to Hate

Prejudice can also be reduced by having people experience what it is like to be the victim of discrimination (see Jane Elliot, 1977 example).

Children may also be effective in teaching one another not to be prejudiced (see Aboud & Doyle, 1996 Quebec study of 3rd & 4th grade children).



Revising Stereotypical Beliefs

People tend to process information in ways that confirm their stereotypes__even if that information completely contradicts the stereotype.

The question arises, What sort of information would actually refute a stereotype?

It seems that it depends partly on how the disconfirming information is presented. Weber and Crocker (1983) present 3 possible models.




Webber and Crocker proposed three possible models of how stereotypes might change when exposed to disconfirming information:

i) The bookkeeping model states that information inconsistent with a stereotype modifies the stereotype.

ii) The conversion model states that a strongly salient inconsistent piece of information radically changes the stereotype.




iii) The sub-typing model states that information inconsistent with a stereotype that leads to the creation of a new sub-stereotype to accommodate the inconsistent information without changing the initial stereotype.

The bookkeeping and sub-typing models are supported by empirical research; the conversion model is not.



The Contact Hypothesis

An especially effective way of reducing prejudice is through contact—bringing in-group and out-group members together, known as the contact hypothesis.

Contact must take place, however, only under certain prescribed conditions, otherwise it can exacerbate the existing negative attitudes. There are six such conditions.



When Contact Reduces Prejudice: Six Conditions

Allport suggested that six conditions are necessary for inter-group contact to reduce prejudice:

i) Mutual interdependence: a situation in which two or more groups need each other and must depend on each other in order to accomplish a goal that is important to each group.

Mutual interdependence is essential for contact to lead to a reduction in prejudice (see Sherif et al, 1961 summer camp study; Fig. 13.8).




ii) A common goal

iii) Equal status of group members

iv) Informal interpersonal contact

v) Multiple contacts with several members of the out-group

vi) Social norms in place that promote equality




When the above six conditions are met, hostile groups will reduce their stereotyping, prejudice, and discriminatory behaviour (Aronson & Bridgeman, 1979).



Cooperation and Interdependence: The Jigsaw Classroom

The jigsaw classroom has been found to be a powerful way to reduce stereotyping and prejudice among children of different ethnicities.

A jigsaw classroom is a classroom setting designed to reduce prejudice and raise the self-esteem of children by placing them in small desegregated groups and making each child dependent on the other children in his or her group to learn the course material and do well in the class.




Aronson and colleagues gathered data from the jigsaw experiments. Results were:

Compared to students in traditional classrooms, students in the jigsaw groups showed a decrease in prejudice and stereotyping, as well as an increase in their liking for their groupmates, both within and across ethnic boundaries.




In addition, children in the jigsaw classrooms performed better on objective exams, liked school more, and showed a significantly greater increase in self-esteem than did children in traditional classrooms.




Moreover, children in schools where the jigsaw technique was practiced developed a greater ability to empathize with others and showed substantial evidence of true integration.




The jigsaw classroom was first tested in 1971. Since then several cooperative techniques have been developed.

The extremely positive results have been replicated in thousands of classrooms in the US and in other countries.




And, cooperative learning has become a major force within the field of public education and generally accepted as one of the most effective ways of improving race relations in schools.



The Extended Contact Hypothesis

Under the right conditions, contact between groups can be highly effective in reducing prejudice.

But it is not always possible to have members of different groups interact, particularly under the right conditions.

Thus, the extended contact hypothesis comes into play




Extended contact hypothesis is the mere knowledge that a member of one’s own group has a close relationship with a member of another group can reduce prejudice toward that group.




Wright et al (1997) found support for this extended contact hypothesis They showed that when one of the group members became friends with the ‘enemy,’ then the remaining group members adopted a more positive attitude toward the out-group, and

they became more generous to the out-group when allocating monetary rewards.




Such results are highly encouraging. They suggest that we, alone, can make a difference simply by becoming friends with a member of an out-group.

And as members of our group learn about this friendship, they will become less prejudiced toward that group.

The End