CHAPTER 9.docx

15 Pages

Course Code
Dwayne Pare

This preview shows pages 1,2,3. Sign up to view the full 15 pages of the document.
CHAPTER 9: REDUCING PREJUDICE  Professor hates males and gives females privileges that males don’t have  Females enjoy this and want status quo to be maintained so they don’t talk to males either and remind males of their place in society  Classroom is a model of fascist authoritarian rule complete with arbitrary prejudice against half of the students in class  Males begin to feel unworthy, decreased self esteem and self efficacy for their classwork (plummeting test scores) and they feel depressed, helpless, frustrated, anxious and angry  Prof decides he’s fed up with females and gives privileges and status to males with females being objects of discrimination, stereotypes and prejudice  Females begin to feel same way males used to feel in response to their plight Experiment:  Jane Elliott taught a 3 grade class in iowa comprised almost all white children  Wanted to teach them about prejudice and what it felt like to be the target of prejudice  Students with “blue eyes” are better than brown eyed students  Blue eyes called on more often, able to go back for 2 helpings at café and could stay out on recess longer  Brown eyed students wore brown arm bands, they quickly became withdrawn and depressed and performance in class suffered  Some got into fights with blue eyed students  Next day she had students switch roles – blue eyed Ps discriminated against and were objects of prejudice  Next day returned to preexperimental state, children had a better understanding of what it’s like to be target of prejudice and more willing to accept people of diff cultures, races, genders  Temporarily disadvantaged students learned empathy for those who are victims of prejudice and how much it hurts to be target of stereotyping  Learned that b/c they did not like anyone stereotyping and discriminating against them, they should not do it to others CONTACT HYPOTHESIS  Truism: people fear the unknown  Taking the SAT or ACT college entrance exam is an unknown situation for high school students each year and they can probably say they approached it with some anxiety  People tend to make assumptions about groups with which they have little contact or about which they have little knowledge (their outgroups)  b/c they have little contact with outgroups, they feel little motivation to be accurate in their assumptions, expectations and generalizations  combination of little or no meaningful contact with outgroups and low motivation to be accurate in one’s assessment of outgroup members prvides the perfect situation for formation of stereotypes about and fear of the outgroup  eliminate the fear of the unknown by having the groups get to know each other  Contact hypothesis: increasing exposure to members of various groups can increase positive evaluations of the outgroup and decrease prejudice and stereotyping  Extremely popular when introduces because of segregation between AAs and Caucasians Allport’s Contact Hypothesis  Putting two groups together (mere contact) is sufficient for the reduction of stereotypes and prejudice  Idea is that people will naturally “work it out” and get to know one another when placed in contact with members of the outgroup  Research has shown that mere contact is ineffective in changing racial attitudes  In order to understand why contact hypothesis only occasionally seemed to work well in reducing intergroup prejudice, it was necessary to ask not, does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? But rather in what types of contact situations, with what kinds of representatives of the disliked group will interaction and attitude change of specified types occur and how will this vary for subjects of differing characteristics?  Reason for this is that upon viewing the member of the outgroup, stereotypes and negative affect are elicited even prior to interaction  Stereotype filters perception of the interaction in ways that confirm stereotypes about the outgroup  By the time the interactants part, the offishness each has shown has confirmed the other’s suspicion. The casual contact has left matters worse than before  In situations of mere contact, 50% of interactions felt more positive about the outgroup, but 50% of the time people felt more negative toward the outgroup  When whites only had casual contact with blacks, 33% of them developmed positive attitudes toward blacks  Whites who had many interactions and many conversations with blacks, nearly 75% reported more positive attitudes toward blacks  One reason externally imposed attempts to foster more tolerant outgroup attitudes often tend to meet with failure is that the majority group reacts to such real or imagines pressure by feeling angry, threatened and as a result of reactance, they then respond to the outgroup with even more negative attitudes  Allport recognized that a whole host of factors affect intergroup-contact context and influence whether participants emerge from the situation with more positive or more negative attitudes toward the outgroup  Effect of contact will depend upon kind of association that occurs, kinds of persons involved  To fully understand any contact situation and to make predictions about outcome of such situations, important to know about characteristics of such situations like status of members (equal, superior), role (cooperative vs competitive) of contact, social atmosphere (prejudice prevalent or equality promoted), personality of interactants (high or low in prejudice toward outgroup and do they have an intolerant (authoritarian personality?) and situations in which contact takes place o Helps understand dynamics of intergroup contact and predict outcomes of intergroup contact (subsequent behaviours, attitudes to outgroup)  Four criteria must be met for positive intergroup contact: o Equal status members o Common goals o Intergroup cooperation o Support of legitimate authority (govt, institutional, cultural support)  Amir offered favorable climate for intergroup contact and conact muct be of an intimate rather than a casual nature  Pettigrew adds that contact situation have “friendship potential” o 13 variables that affect contact situation exist TESTS OF CONTACT HYPOTHESIS  When whites and blacks brought into contact in the work arena after desegregation efforts began, each group reported more positive feelings about the other  Desegregated public housing o Equal status contact between white and AA neighbors resulted in more favorable attitudes of white individuals toward equal housing policies  AAs in a desegregated housing project had more positive attitudes toward their white neighbors than did their segregated AA counterparts  Contact over a period of time (2 h/ day for 20 days) can change intergroup attitudes  White women who were selected b/c of their highly negative attitudes toward AAs interacted with an AA woman on a cooperative task  Contact was close, interactacts had equal status and they had a superordinate goal that they were working toward  40% of women in experimental group showed a significant positive change in racial attitudes toward AAs  Contact hypothesis has falled into disfavor among prejudice researchers b/c it has grown into atheoretical laundry list of factors that facilitate the positive effects of ingroup outgroup contact  Some researches have confused factors that are essential with those that are facilitative in intergroup contact  Research tends to focus on when and why contact will result in positive intergroup attitudes, but does not speak to how this change in attitudes occurs in contact situation  Contact hypothesis doesn’t specify how positive feelings toward an outgroup member in the contact situation can generalize to one’s feelings for the whole outgroup  Member to group generalization does not occur PETTIGREW’S REFORMULATED CONTACT THEORY  Proposed a longitudinal model of how optimal contact situation should proceed and of changes that need to take place before individuals start to think of outgroup members as potential friends and as members of a bigger ingroup  Researchers need to be aware that individuals bring their own intergroup experiences and biases and their own personality characteristics to the contact situation  Situation must have allport’s 4 necessary conditions and pettigrew’s additional condition o Potential to become friends with outgroup member For any prejudice and stereotype reduction to take place  When ingroup and outgroup members encounter each other in an inditial contact situation, group members will regard each other with initial anxiety but then begin decategorization in which they begin to see each other in terms of their personalities and characteristics rather than their group membership  Decategorization – groups get together through interacting withoutgroup individuals  By individuating members of outgroup, one realizes that they are unique persons who have varying opinions and as much variability as one’s own ingroup o Outgroup category becomes useless as a heuristic(mental short cut) in understanding an individual member of that category  From here, established prolonged contact facilitates salient categorization whereby group members begin to think fo outgroup members as representative of outgroup in general and begin to change their negative view of the ntie outgroup  Recategorization – last step o Intergroup context is configured to encourage a breakdown of “us” vs “them”distinct categories and form a broader “we” category by making members of both groups aware that they have more in common on a number of other dimensions (arts, jobs, dreams) that outweigh their differences in race, gender or etc.  Most intergroup contact situations never reach this stage  CHECK FIG 9.1 page 245 SHERIF’S ROBBER’S CAVE STUDY: THE SUPERORDINATE GOAL  When two groups compete for scarce resources, prejudice and stereotypes between the 2 groups will result  When groups are in conflict, they think of outgroup in stereotyped ways and begin to feel hostility toward the outgroup  Groups feel greater loyal to their ingroup as a result of the conflict Robber’s Cave Study  Sherif had 2 groups of boys at a summer cmap compete for a scarce resource  Prejudice erupted between the groups  Sheriff shifted experiment to attempt to reduce prejudice  Discontinued competitions  If intergroup competition increased prejudice, perhaps coopepration between groups would reduce or eliminate prejudice  Arranged for 2 problems o Bus break down while it was full fo boys and interrupted water supply to camp  Problems represented a superordinate goal, in that no group could remedy the situation alone  They needed to cooperate to help each other in order to solve the problem  They worked together, solved the crises and both counselors and sheriff noticed a change in the boys  When boys asked who their friends were, much more likely to include members of other group  Name calling was eliminated and winning group chose to split their prize money from competition with other group members at an ice cream shop  Study showed that prejudice and outgroup hostility can be caused by completion, but can be greatly reduced or elimintated via intergroup cooperation on a superordinate goal COMMON INGROUP IDENTITY  Prejudice can be reduced through encouragement of superodinate ingroup identities  Intergroup prejudice can be reduced by breaking down salience of groups’ category membership and by getting groups to reconceptualize themselves as all members of a larger, common ingroup identity  Common ingroup identity model works through decategorization and recategorization  When participants in 2 separate groups felt more positive affect via induction of candy and when groups were made to feel less distinct through similar clothes and goals, they were more likely to view their own group and other group as members of one large group with shared goals  Prejudice, stereotyping and outgroup bias or ingroup favouritism were diminished  Paradox: processes that lead to ingroup favoritism can be used to promote a superordinate ingroup identity and to reduce ingroup/outgroup distinctions, thereby reducing prejudice  Other research has found support for common ingroup identity model in real world settings of a multiethnic high school and corporate world  Holding 2 separate group identities (one’s ingroup and common ingroup identity) can lead to increased likelihood of prejudice and discrimination toward outgroups  Group members perceive their ingroup as prototypical of the common ingroup identity and this projection of their ingroup to the overall identity of the common ingroup led them to regard all other common ingroup members as even more diff from them  This perception led group members to be more likely to hold negative attitudes toward the other common ingroup members  More research needed to clarify conditions under which forming a commin ingroup identity leads to a reduction in prejudice toward outgroup members THE CONFRONTATION TECHNIQUE OF ROKEACH  “American Dilemma”  Many white Americans have egalitarian beliefs but still harbor prejudiced tendencies and therefore they feel a moral conflict  People should be dissatisfied with themselves – guilty when they are made aware of this discrepancy within themselves  Once this occurs, people should be willing to revise their prejudiced attitudes to alleviate their moral conflict and its attendant negative affect o Follows cognitive-dissonance theory – when people experience inconsistencies between their thoughts and behaviors, they’ll feel negative arousal o Arousal will motivate them to choose the easiest factor to change (almost always it’s one’s attitude) to bring it in line with another factor (behavior) and reduce negative arousal  When white subjects were made aware of the discrepancy between their self views and their values, they changed their values and this value change led to changes in their attitude and behavior toward blacks  Other researchers reported no significant changes in intergroup attitudes and behavior as a result of Rokeach’s value confrontation technique Confrontation with individuals high in right wing authoritatianism  RWA characterized by high degree of submission, aggression and conventionalism (traditionalism)  RWAs highly prejudiced against everyone who is diff from them  Altmeyer asked students to complete a scale measuring RWA and rank 10 values (friendship etc.) in terms of their personal importance  Low and high RWAs ranked freedom ahead of equality  Results were shown to them and according to Rokeach’s technique, the discrepancy between their value fo freedom and equality and how they feel about others’ (minorities’) struggle for equality  High RWA attitudes toward minorities and minority related social issues such as affirmative action did not change as a result of personal value confrontation technique compared with high RWAs who were not confronted with the value discrepancy  Technique yields mixed results, but altmeyer is still optimistic that it can be useful inr educing prejudice  When researcher is able to address the defensiveness sparked by the procedure the technique can work with many high RWAs  When high RWAs realize a core discrepancy between their stated values and who they are in terms of their RWA characteristics and tendencies they usually show some sillingness to change if not motivated by benevolent insight then atleast by selfish desire to reduce their cognitive dissonance JIGSAW CLASSROOM  Brown vs Board of Education decision by U.S 1954 ended segregation between blacks and whites  How would blacks and whites get along now that they would be intermingling in society? Would there be chaos? Or would prejudice just disappear once people got to know members of the other group as simple contact theory would suggest?  Typical elementary classroom environment in U.S is based on competition between individual students for the attention and praise of the teacher  Students who are called on frequently and who are correct in their answers feel better about themselves and perform better than their classmates yet are often resented by their peers  When minorities were being bused to white schools they were competing in an inherently unequal environment b/c whites had a more advantaged educational experience and were more likely to “win” in competition for teacher’s attention and praise  When racial tensions that existed between the 2 groups were added to the competitive atmostphere o Negative feelings each group had for the other were exacerbated Aronson et al wanted to attempt to eliminate competition and structure interdependent cooperation between blacks and whites in the classroom in order to examine the impact of such a structure on prejudice and stereotyping  Placed students into small groups of 6 each  New structure of classroom where teacher was not omniscient repository of all answers, students were to use each other as resources  Researchers made individual competitiveness incompatible with success and set up classroom such that success only resulted from cooperation  Each student in small group was given a unique skill or piece of info  To complete task, each member must contribute and rely on other group members  Each child was tested over all the material given to that group  b/c of their mutual interdependence for task success, model was referred to as jigsaw system for intergroup cooperation  interdependence reduced need for competition and discouraged ridicule of others in their group on basis of stereotypes, shyness or being less bright than the others  teachers informed students that such behavior would not help their group and could only hurt their chances of success  students were motivated and reinforced to help each other  their preconceptions, fear and stereotypes about the outgroup members slowly eroded in light of these positive experiences Results:  children in the jigsaw classrooms liked their group members more than others in the classroom  black and white children began to like each other more, their self esteem increased and their performance was as good or better than competitive classrooms  cooperative jisaw settings are very effective in increasing positive intergroup attitudes and behavior and in decreasing stereotyping and prejudice  other researchers suggest that impact of jigsaw cooperative groups will be even stronger in situations where Ps focus on getting to know individual personalities (individuate the person) of their group members  more likely to think of their group members in terms of their individual attributes and characteristics rather than in terms of their category (racial, gender) membership  positive benefits of the cooperative group situation could be enhanced if additional factors characterized the situation  cooperative groups foster more positive outgroup attitudes when: o group is successful o outgroup members are seen as competent o group members self-disclose to each other o group members are seen as similar  empirical date indicate strong support for efficacy of cooperative learning groups in reducing intergroup stereotyping and prejudice  positive attitudes and reduced prejudice generalizes to members of outgroup other than those involved in cooperative group experience  outcome dependence or interdependence between groups, not only those engaged in cooperative learning facilitates individuation of outgroup members and reduces prejudice  some research has uncovered a few factors that can facilitate generalization from one’s positive feelings about outgroup members in the small cooperative group to the entire outgroup  if counterstereotypic info is spread across several outgroup members, they’re less likely to be subtyped and perceiver is more likely to realize the variability of the outgroup and less likely to think of outgroup members in stereotyped terms  if counterstereotypic person in small cooperative group is seen as typical fo outgroup, generalization to outgroup is more likely to occur  if people have time to consider discrepancy between their feelings for the outgroup member in the cooperative group and their attitude toward the outgroup, they may be more likely to generalize their positive feelings toward the outgroup EDUCATION, EMPATHY AND ROLE PLAYING  if one assumes that prejudice is enhanced by lack of info about outgroup, fear of outgroup and overall lack of understanding of perspective of outgroup then it would stand to reason that prejudice could be greatly reduced by educating people about outgroups o showing them that outgroup members are more similar to them then they are different, helping them understand what it’s like to be the target of prejudice so they won’t be prejudiced toward others and helping them begin to
More Less
Unlock Document

Only pages 1,2,3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


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.