Class Notes (866,995)
CA (523,442)
UTSG (45,344)
PSY (3,594)
PSY322H1 (18)
Lecture 7

PSY322 Lecture 7.docx

5 Pages

Course Code
Alison Chasteen

This preview shows pages 1 and half of page 2. Sign up to view the full 5 pages of the document.

Loved by over 2.2 million students

Over 90% improved by at least one letter grade. are saying about us

Leah — University of Toronto

OneClass has been such a huge help in my studies at UofT especially since I am a transfer student. OneClass is the study buddy I never had before and definitely gives me the extra push to get from a B to an A!

Leah — University of Toronto
Saarim — University of Michigan

Balancing social life With academics can be difficult, that is why I'm so glad that OneClass is out there where I can find the top notes for all of my classes. Now I can be the all-star student I want to be.

Saarim — University of Michigan
Jenna — University of Wisconsin

As a college student living on a college budget, I love how easy it is to earn gift cards just by submitting my notes.

Jenna — University of Wisconsin
Anne — University of California

OneClass has allowed me to catch up with my most difficult course! #lifesaver

Anne — University of California
Lecture 7: Experiencing Prejudice  The Self Protective Hypothesis:  Crocker and Major  Predicted that white has higher self-esteem than black people, however they found out that they report similar levels of self-esteem  Being a part of a stigmatized group must have some protective mechanisms, they need to do something to maintain their self-esteem.  Why is self-esteem not lower among stigmatized individuals? 1. Engage in self-protective external attributions  Attributing outcomes to other variables other than the self.  It is not me who has a problem; it is just that the other person is prejudiced.  Attribute negative outcomes to prejudice 2. Make social comparisons with in-group  Avoid comparisons with advantaged out-group members. It is not fair to compare to an advantaged out-group.  Compare with people in your in-group. 3. Selective valuing and de-valuing of performance dimensions  De-value domains where group fares poorly  Values domains where group excels  Protect against discrimination for the stereotyped negative performances  Group disparity. Selectively do something that they are stereotyped well to do.  Attribution Ambiguity:  Crocker et al (1991)  Stigmatized people’s chronic uncertainty: motives for others behaviour  Innocent until proven guilty vs. guilty until proven innocent.  Start at the point where everyone is an egalitarian, I am not going to think that you are prejudiced until you do something that is prejudiced. Too trusting and thus when they get negative feedback they would be unable to protect themselves, they will internalize the negative feedback.  Start at the point where you assume everyone is prejudiced unless they prove otherwise. Thinks that the positive feedback is due to compensation and pity.  Stigmatized people are always confused on how to interpret feedback.  Participants: Blacks  Measure: self-esteem pre-feedback  Told that there is a white partner in the other room and that they are going to be evaluated.  White partner gives feedback: blinds up or down, partners can/can’t see Ps.  They just let the participants infer, they did not say that the blinds are down  IV: 1. blinds up or down 2. feedback positive or negative  DV: 1. Self-esteem post feedback 2. Attributions about feedback from partner  Predictions: Participants with their blinds up would lead to negative outcomes even with positive feedback.  Results: 1. When blinds are up, they are more likely to attribute positive outcomes to prejudice than when the blinds are down. 2. When blinds are up, they are more likely to attribute negative outcomes to prejudice than when the blinds are down. 3. People are rating negative feedbacks overall due to prejudice, even when they could not be seen  self-protecting. 4. Self-esteem change: when people are unseen and they get negative feedback, their self-esteem dropped. It must be true feedback. 5. When people are seen and they get negative feedback, their self-esteem stayed constant. That evaluator’s racist. 6. When people are unseen and they get positive feedback, their self-esteem went up. They think that I am good! 7. When people are seen and they get positive feedback, their self-esteem dropped the most. When you get positive feedback that is not true, it hurts more than negative feedback that is true.  How Attributions to Prejudice Protect the Self  Major et al (2003)  All participants read in which they try and fail to add a course. The course is extremely important.  You go to a friend that has inside information.  Conditions: 1. Prejudice condition: only members of the opposite gender get into the course by a professor of the opposite gender. External. 2. Everyone rejected condition: the professor did not like anyone. External. 3. Personal rejection
More Less
Unlock Document
Subscribers Only

Only pages 1 and half of page 2 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
Subscribers Only
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document
Subscribers Only

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.