Class Notes (808,754)
Canada (493,378)
Psychology (7,620)
PSYC12H3 (374)
Lecture 10

PSYC12H3 Lecture 10: Lecture-10

9 Pages
Unlock Document

University of Toronto Scarborough
Shona Tritt

Lecture 10 Focusing on the effect of stereotyping. What its like to be the target of stigma. Stigma – a devalued trait/characteristic; stigmatized ppl are discriminated against • Diff types of stigma: i. Abominations of the body – physical characteristics, deformities, or being overweight. They stand out in various cultures and are devalued ii. Blemishes of the indiv character – things that connote something that’s wrong iii. Trival stigmas of race – certain groups in society associated w something that is devalued in that culture i.e. in America, historically the black race has been devalued and stigmatized • There are so many ways ppl can be stigmatized, that almost everyone has felt it at some point or another • Only recently psychologists have tried to understand the processes of what happens when someone gets stigmatized • The experience of feeling stigmatized can lead to poor mental health outcomes, poor physical health outcomes, academic underachievement, lower infant mortality rates, higher poverty rates. • Some of the things is due to the stimagized having fewer advantages  less access to researchers, or feeling stigmatized is disheartening and isn’t good for the psyche • Stigma can directly affect the way ppl treat others – whether consciously or implicitly  can elicit diff reactions which can serve to conform stereotypes and elicit via self-fulfilling prophecies • Model: by making them feel threatened by their identity, it leads them to cope with these threats in ways that can affect mental and physical outcomes Complex model: • 2005- identity threat model. Provides a good overview of the way in which stigma can affect outcomes such as mental health, physical and self esteem • According to this model, all the representatons talk about cultural stereotypes – the collective beliefs about diff groups ins ociety • Situational cues – can be a situational trigger that heightens the salience of one stigmatized identity i.e. being an only women in a room full of men who are studying math - a situational que that would make your identity salient • Stigma characteristics – heighten the identity of ur stigmatized status providing a threat; like expecting to be treated differently bcz the person is AWARE – so u are more sensitive to feeling like people are perceiving you as not so good at some things • The stigmatized person will feel identity threat  if they feel threatened then they feel non-volitional responses (physiological responses i.e. HR, BP, cortisol) or volitional response (psychological like intentionally trying to regulate yourself so that this aspect of identity is not so salient) and how u cope during both processes with your identity being threatened  leads to various outcomes. • Identity threat can lead to negative health outcomes, self esteem issues, academic achievement, etc. • Identity Threat Model of Stigma: situational cues, collective representations of one’s stigma status, and personal characteristics  shapes appraisals of stigma-relevant situations ➢ Having a DEVALUED identity (devalued in society)  leads to increasing the person’s exposure to stressful situations (identity-threatening situations) Volitional Responses: efforts to REGULATE emotion, cognition, physiology, circumstances that are stressful • Intentionally trying to regulate your world so the aspect of their identity is not so salient i.e. you don’t blame YOURSELF for being a target of stigma • How you cope thru volitional and non-volitional processes with your identity being threatened • Identity threat non-directly leads to negative outcomes i.e. neg. health outcomes, self esteem problems and physical neg. outcomes i.e. Academic achievement • Volitional coping strategies: i. Attributing negative events to discrimination (rather than themselves) o Blaming outcomes on discrimination rather than themselves o Protects yourself from negative self-esteem o Unaware of your own positive and negative assets/strengths/weaknesses o Attribution Ambiguity- someone might do this to protect your self esteem i.e. if you don’t get a job  its hurtful, but u might attribute it to your gender, religion, etc. Rather than the fact that it might just be you unqualified for it. ii. Disengaging self-esteem & effort from identity-threatening domains o Example: women might consider math to be NOT important. o Certain groups who are perceived to be less book smart, they would say that doesn’t matter, it matters if Im street-smart so they don’t continue school o This can be adaptive and maladaptive – it can be healthy if you are not good at a particular domain and u can justify that the domain is not impt  preserving a bit of ru self esteem o While it might maintain your PERSONAL SELF ESTEEM  allows the maintenance of the stereotype to exist, so the groups of people that are not good at this thing will disengage their effort and not try as hard. o The disengagement of ur self esteem in an area comes at the cost of succeeding in those domains iii. Identifying one self with their stigmatized group (being aware that you may be a minority + stigmatized for it) o Can either identify or disidentify with their group o Groups can provide support, social validation, and its nice if u feel like its valuing to be with others that feel similar experiences in discrimination o If u feel that a part of ur identity is usually perceived negatively, it feels good to connect w others with the same identity o Helps have a sense of belonging o Can lead to people members of stigmatized groups, in the face of feeling stigmatized and become MORE connected to their ingroup o Not everyone benefits from this; some members who are not often identified, will cope by decreasing their identification in the group  wishing they were not even part of this stigmatized group o Latin-American students -if had low levels of group identifications, they were identified even less with their ethnic group o Ifyou are very connected to your identity – i.e. really feeling like you’re in touch with the identity  then feeling stigmatized for having that identity  you feel EVEN MORE connected to that identity o There are things like cultural stereotypes and personal characteristics  makes u feel more vulnerable to being stigmatized o Once you perceive IDENTITY THREAT or feel like you’ve been discriminated against, you can cope in a variety of ways • Non-volitional responses: just being stressed out from the stigma, increase in cortisol levels, etc OUTCOMES OF STIGMATIZATION 1. Self esteem • Relationship between stigma and self-esteem • 2 diff types of self-esteem: personal (measured w/ implicit or self-report measures) vs. collective (self-concept deriving from your knowledge of your membership in a social group) • Personal Self Esteem - Feeling good about yourself • Collective Self Esteem - Regretful? - Being happy to be a member of the social group - Is it worthwhile - How do you feel about the social group - Knowledge of what most people think about your social group - How good u feel about ur group, how much u think ur group is valued, how much you identify yourself with that group  does it represent you etc. • The more an indiv is a member of stigmatized group and the more stigmatized their group, the LOWER the self- esteem should be • Those who are in non-stigmatized groups  should have HIGHER self esteem than those who are in stigmatized groups • Within stigmatized groups, those who have higher value (Asian Americans) should have higher self esteem than those of lower value (Blacks, Latinos) • Those who are stigmatized, may internalize the negative views held by society, geared towards them • The COLLECTIVE self esteem among African, Latino, Asian Americans > white Americans, there is more of a sense of belonging in their own stigmatized group, and they have internalized their identity and everytime they are discriminated against, it makes them stronger as individuals/as a whole group • They considered Asian Americans to be not so stereotyped  Black and latino groups were more stigmatized • Meta-analysis: they found there was no support for the prediction that the groups that were the most stigmatized had lowest self esteem  they saw that African americans who were stigmatized the MOST, had higher personal self esteem .. • There is no correlation between how stigmatized the group is, and how high your personal self=esteem is • Implicit measures: i.e. IAT - Looking at how quickly associate concepts - Using indirect measures of COLLECTIVE self esteem  white indivs demonstrate ingroup favoritism and latinos etc demonstrate outgroup favoritism - Among members of minority groups in America, they have implicit bias towards white people - The implicit story is what we would expect that the more stigmatized u are, the lower u shud be with self esteem  but not so much with explicit measured, whether collective or personal self-esteem - When looking at non-racial stigmas (i.e, being overweight) - Younger and older adults have equallevels of self esteem in explicit and implicit measures; older adults implicitly favor younger adults - Women vs men: women self-report lower levels of personal self-esteem than men, but score equally on personal levels of self-esteem - These results are inconsistent - You cant assume that the more stigmatized a person is, the lower their self-esteem and that is bizarre • Some researchers have wondered if perceived controlled ability predicts personal self esteem. i.e., if you have a controllable stigma, or perceived to be controllable then that’s when it really leads to low self-esteem • Being overweight leads to low self esteem and its perceived to be controllable although its not • Since people who are overweight, perceive or know that othrs might perceive that they shouldn’t be overweight and theres a personal flaw for why they are overweight  leads to dramatically low self esteem • If you are member of a racial group that has been historically stigmatized i.e. in ur culture, there is nothing u can do about it – u can not change it, and u can not blame yourself and this is why if u cant control or stop it, it does not affect your self esteem and you find ways to work around it. Attibutional Ambiguity - When there is something diff abt u, u can attribute itt o ur stigma or ur personal quialities and u will never really know which one it really was  it can work for you (by helping to preserve your self esteem i.e. if u do badly on a test, u can say the test was biased or unfair rather than u not being smart enough for it) - You never really know the real reason - Having it as a possible explanation can help ppl preserve their self esteem - Another way to find that the stigmatized can increase their self esteem, is that they often compare themselves to the ingroup rather than the outgroup - A common phenomenon: if u are 2SD above the mean in terms of ur socioeconomic status u might still feel poor bc u compare urself to the ppl in ur neighborhood—its because we self-select ourselves to ppl who are similar to us - If u relate urself to ppl with ur same stigma-status it does not effect yourself as much - There is not much of a clear relationship between self estee and stigma Devaluing dimensions - If your group is bad at academics  u might devalue academics and not try so hard - If u do badly, u assume its bc a) its not important or b) u didn’t try hard • There is always a tendency for us to wonder: why didn’t we do well on the test, or get the job? • Sometimes we think it may be us, other times we think it’s the other person • For ppl who are VISIBLY stigmatized  u never know for sure why u might receive a negative outcome (attributional ambiguity) • Attributional ambiguity: an uncertainty about Why PEOPLE behave towards u in a certain way Self-esteem thru attributional ambituity: Study by Crocker et al. • Exp 1: they had female subjects believe they would be writing an essay  critiqued by a 2 subject seated in a diff room • Female sbjects heard a male subject giving them feedback  they knew whether the male was being sexist in the way he gave negative feedback, or was not being sexist • They found that women who received negative feedback from a maleevaluator who sounded like he was prejudice  attributed the negative feedback towards his prejudice, rather than who they ARE as a person/their skills  so it still preserved their self-esteem, because their outcome was due to HIS prejudice • Exp 2: black participants receiving feedback from a white evaluator whether being seen or unseen (by a blind being up or down) • This experiment was about friendship, and one participant sat in a desk and the other can see them or not see them • They wanted to know why people make friends • Every subject was paired with a white student => experiment returned to the roo with a favorable or unfavorable response • They wanted to know will someone feel worse or better after receiving negative feedback from someone who can SEE THEM or NOT SEE THEM. • If they could not see them  low self esteem • If they could see them  did not move their personal self esteem because they attributed it to discrimination since the white person can see the person being black  more attributed to prejudice • If you are seen, you are more l
More Less

Related notes for PSYC12H3

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

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

Sign up

Join to view


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.