Class Notes (836,147)
Canada (509,656)
Psychology (7,782)
PSYB10H3 (544)
Lecture

Lec 4-Intergroup Relations, Stereotyping & Prejudice.docx

4 Pages
38 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSYB10H3
Professor
Elizabeth Page- Gould
Semester
Fall

Description
Lec 4 (Pg.138-187): Intergroup Relations, Stereotyping & Prejudice INgroup  A social group to which you belong OUTgroup  A social group to which you do NOT belong Intergroup Processes  Situations, cognitions, beliefs, and feelings that arise when people from different groups interact with or think about each other Social Identity Theory  A diffuse but interrelated set of theories about when and why individuals identify with, and behave as a part of, social groups • Assumptions, Components Assumptions of Social Identity Theory  We have all have a need for positive self-regard How do we achieve this positive self-regard? • Via our own achievements • Via identification with the achievements of the social groups to which we belong Social Identity Theory 1. Categorization 2. Identification 3. Comparison 4. Psychological Distinctiveness Categorization  People naturally group other social objects into groups Creates ingroup-outgroup distinction Group Categorization Why do we categorize people into groups? Old way of thinking: -Laziness New way of thinking: -Cognitive miser Cognitive miser perspective • We have limited cognitive resources that must be conserved • Engage in mental shortcuts (e.g., heuristics) Applied to group categorization: • Categorize people on the basis of shared features • Can trivially create “minimal groups” Minimal Groups  Ingroups and Outgroups formed on trivial, highly context-specific features Minimal Group Paradigm  Creating ingroups and outgroups from the most minimal of conditions Classic examples: Sandals versus sneakers on 1st day of class, Blue versus yellow t-shirts distributed in the lab (Tajfel&Turner) Method: 1. Participants come into lab in groups 2. Asked to estimate the number of dots on a page 3. Randomly assigned to groups: “Overestimators” and “Underestimators” 4. Participants rate each group… give study payment to ingroup or outgroup member Results: • Overestimators viewed Underestimators as less likeable, kind, and effective than Overestimators • Underestimators viewed Overestimators as less likeable, kind, and effective than Underestimators • Overestimators distributed much less money to Underestimators • Underestimators distributed much less money to overestimators Summary: Minimal Groups • Group categorization occurs rapidly and even trivially • Impact of group categorization is profound Identification  The processes of associating the self with certain ingroups • Bolsters self-esteem • Effects of social identity theory are dependent on identification with the group Comparison • We compare ingroups with outgroups, seeing a favourable bias toward the group to which we belong • Ingroup Favouritism • Outgroup Derogation Ingroup Favouritism • Belief that the Ingroup is good across a variety of characteristics and more deserving of good things • Maintains positive status of group (and positive self-regard) Examples: • Remember only the good (and not bad) characteristics of group members • Alloca
More Less

Related notes for PSYB10H3

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit