Textbook Notes (363,559)
Canada (158,426)
Psychology (1,390)
PSYC 215 (296)
John Lydon (79)
Chapter 11

PSYC215 Chapter 11 Summary (Bona Kim).docx

17 Pages
Unlock Document

McGill University
PSYC 215
John Lydon

Bona Kim PSYC215 Chapter Summary CHAPTER 11 - Stereotyping, prejudice, and Discrimination (pgs. 407-449) - Where do stereotypes, prejudices, and discrimination come from? Why do they persist? What can be done to eliminate or reduce their impact? o 3 general perspectives that shed light on these issues:  1. The economic perspective: identifies the roots of much intergroup hostility in the competing interests that set many groups apart from one another  2. The motivational perspective: emphasizes the psychological needs and wishes that lead to intergroup conflict  3. The cognitive perspective: traces the origin of stereotyping to the same cognitive processes that allow people to categorize  takes into account the frequent conflict between people’s consciously held beliefs and values and their quick, reflexive relations to members of specific racial, ethnic, occupational or other demographic groups CHARACTERIZING INTERGROUP BIAS - stereotypes: generalizations about groups that are often applied to individual group members o way of categorizing people - can be positive or negative, true or false o involves thinking about a person not as an individual, but as members of a group, and projecting what (you think) you know about the group unto your expectations about the individual o Examples: American house, a german car, French food…etc. - prejudice: negative attitude and emotional response to members of a group o negative attitudes have received the most attention, but its possible to be positively prejudiced toward a particular group o involves prejudicing others because they belong to a specific category - discrimination: negative or harmful behavior toward an individual because of the person’s membership in a group. Involves unfair treatment of others that’s not based on their character of abilities. - all three of these refer to the belief, attitudinal, and behavioural components of negative intergroup relations (often go together but you can have one without the other) o a person can discriminate without prejudice (Jewish parents say they don’t want their children to marry outside the faith, not because they have a low opinion of other groups, but because they are concerned about future of Judaism) o a person can be prejudiced and not discriminate (culture frowns on discrimination. Civil Rights laws in the U.S. are specifically designed to uncouple prejudiced attitudes and discriminatory actions) Modern Racism - latant, explicit racism in much of the world is now relatively rare, but modern racism still exists - modern racism: people hold overtly egalitarian attitudes (and reject explicitly racist beliefs) while unconsciously holding negative attitudes and exhibiting more subtle forms of prejudice - Gaertner and Dovidio: explored the conflicts and inconsistencies that often accompany modern racism o Modern racism stems from ingroup favouritism and a desire to defend the status quo o Whether these individuals will act in a prejudiced or discriminatory manner depends on the details of the situation o If the situation offers no justification or “disguise” for discriminatory action, their responses will conform to their egalitarian values o If a suitable rationalization is available, the modern racist’s prejudices will emerge - Example 1: Participants were in a position to aid a white or black individual in need of medical assistance o If the participants thought they were the only one who could help, they came to the aid of the black victim somewhat more often (94%) than for the white victim (81%) Bona Kim PSYC215 Chapter Summary o When they thought that others were present and their inaction could be justified on nonracial grounds, they helped the black victim much less often than the white victim o In situations like such as this, the prejudice or discrimination is “masked” an individual remains comfortably unaware of being racist - Example 2: white participants evaluated black and white applicants to college o When the applicants excelled on certain dimensions and were below average on others, the ratings of prejudiced and unprejudiced participants diverged:  the prejudiced participants rated the black applicants less favourably than did the unprejudiced participants  In these latter cases, prejudiced participants’ discriminatory responses could be defended as nondiscriminatory - that is, they could be hidden - by claiming that the dimensions on which the black applicants fell short were more important than those on which they excelled - when the desire to appear unprejudiced is sufficiently strong (i.e. when the audience might be particularly disapproving), the opposite result sometimes occurs: bias directed at the ingroup o in one study, white participants first read that “some admissions procedures are alleged to be biased, and activist groups are pressuring colleges all over the country to review and reevaluate their admissions criteria” o when they then read the application folders of black applicants who were strong on some dimensions and weak on others, they rated them more favourably than they rated comparable white applicants, and they did so by judiciously choosing which dimensions of accomplishment should receive more weight Benevolent Racism and Sexism - many of our “isms” (Racism, sexism, ageism) are ambivalent: contain both positive and negative features o someone might believe that women are less competent and intelligent than men, and at the same time belive women are warmer and have better social skills - Benevolent sexism (ideology that offers protection and affection to women who embrace conventional roles) often coexists with hostile sexism (dislike of women who are viewed as unsurping men’s power) - benevolent racism and sexism: consist of attitudes the individual thinks of as favourable toward a group but that have the effect of supporting traditional, subservient roles for members of disadvantaged groups (inhibit progress toward equality) o those who hold ambivalent attitudes tend to act positively toward members of outgroups only if they fulfill their idealized image of what such people should be like  for example: the happy housewife or the playboy centerfold - Peter Glick and Susan Fiske: work on ambivalent sexism o Interviewed 15,000 men and women in 19 nations and found that benevolent sexism (a chivalrous ideology that offers protection and affection to women who embrace conventional roles) often coexists with hostile sexism (dislike of women who are viewed as unsurping men’s power) o even these partly positive stereotypes aren’t really benign o Ambivalent sexist or racist attitudes may be particularly resistant to change o The favourable features of such belief structures enable the stereotype holder to deny any prejudice Measuring Attitudes about Groups - So many forms of prejudice are ambivalent, uncertain or hidden, even from the self - They are not likely to be revealed through self-report - Recently, there have been successful efforts to measure people’s nonconscious attitudes with “implicit” measures Bona Kim PSYC215 Chapter Summary The Implicit Association Test (IAT) by Anthony Greenwald and Mazarin Banaji - Implicit Association Test (IAT): compares reaction times when outgroup pictures (or words) and positive items are in the same response category vs. when outgroup pictures )or words) and negative items are in the same category o technique for revealing subtle, nonconscious prejudices, even among those who advocate universal equality and high regard for all groups o A series of words/pics are presented on a computer screen and the respondent is told to press a key with the left hand if the pic/word conforms to one rule (i.e. a female name or a weak word) and to press another key with the right hand if it conforms to another rule (i.e. a male name or a strong word) o Argued that respondents would be faster to press one key for members of a particular group and words stereotypically associated with that group then to press the same key for members of that group and words that contradict the stereotype associated with that group o The same general procedure is used to assess implicit prejudice, but in this case, participants are first asked to press one key for both positive words and either photos or the names of people in one group, and another key for both negative words and people in another group  For example, people prejudiced against old people should be faster to press the appropriate key when the same key is used for old faces and negative words and slower when the same key is used for old faces and positive words  Participants then repeat the procedure with the pairings of the two groups and positive/negative words switched  A nonconscious prejudice toward old people would be captured by the difference between the average time it takes to respond to old faces/positive words and the average time it takes to respond to old/faces and negative words - Researchers have found that both young and older individuals show a pronounced prejudice in favour of the young over the old, and about 2/3rds of white respondents show a strong or moderate prejudice for white over black o About half of all black respondents also show some prejudice in favour of white faces - There is evidence that IAT responses do correlate with other measures of prejudice o In one study, participants in a brain-imaging machine were shown pictures of black and white faces  The participants’ earlier IAT responses were significantly correlated with heightened neural activity in the amylgada (a brain center associated with emotional learning and evaluation) in response to black faces  Their scores on a more traditional, conscious measure of prejudice, the Modern Racism Scale, were not correlated with this difference in neural activity, suggesting that the IAT assessed an important component of attitudes that participants were unable or unwilling to articulate o In another study, participants interacted with a white experimenter, took the IAT, and then interacted with a black experimenter  The participants’ IAT scores predicted the discrepancy between how much they spoke to the white vs. the black experimenter, how often they smiled at the white vs. black experimenter, and the # of speech errors and hesitations they exhibited when interacting with the white vs. black experimenter Priming and Implicit Prejudice - Social psychologists have also measured prejudices that individuals might not know they have, or that they may wish to deny, by using a number of priming (mental activation; procedure used to increase the accessibility of a concept or schema) procedures o If I show you the word butter then you’re more likely to recognize the word bread than the word car because of preexisting association with bread and butter o If you associate nuns with virtue and charity, then you are likely to response to positive terms after seeing a picture of a nun Bona Kim PSYC215 Chapter Summary - An implicit measure of prejudice can thus be derived by comparing a person’s average reaction time to positive and negative words preceded by faces of members of the target category - priming with a picture of a member of some group. o If the prime increases the time it takes to recognize subsequently presented positive words and decreases the time it takes to recognize subsequently presented negative words, prejudice toward the group is revealed. o Priming have shown that people often have subtle prejudices against various target groups that they would steadfastly deny having THE ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE - according to the economic view, groups develop prejudices about one another and discriminate against one another when they compete for material resources o religious groups, racial groups, and cultural groups are ready to protect and promote their own interests by lashing out at those they perceive to be threatening them o example: immigrants from Mexico and Central America face harshest discrimination from U.S. citizens who seem them as threats to their own jobs Realistic Group Conflict Theory - one version of the economic perspective: realistic group conflict theory o a theory that group conflict, prejudice, and discrimination are likely to arise over competition between groups for scarce resources o groups sometimes confront real conflict over what are essentially economic issues o prejudice and discrimination should increase under conditions of economic difficulty o prejudice and discrimination should be strongest among groups that stand to lose the most from another group’s economic advance o example: people in the working class in the U.S. exhibited the most anti-black prejudice in the wake of the Civil Rights movement  working class jobs were most at risk once millions of black Americans were allowed to compete more freely for entry-level manufacturing jobs in companies o specifies some of the ways that conflict between groups is likely to play out  1. a pronounded ethnocentrism develops: the other group is vilified and one’s own group is glorified  people in the outgroup are often thought of in stereotyped ways and are treated in a manner normally forbidden by one’s moral code  loyalty to the ingroup intensifies  example: 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center, different racial groups in the U.S. seemed to pull together more than they had beforehand  telling white students that the attacks were directed at all Americans, regardless of race and class, served to reduce prejudice toward African-Americans The Robbers Cave Experiment - Muzafer Sherif et al. o 22 5 grade boys were taken to Robbers Cave State Park in Oklahoma  Robbers Cave Experiment: put 2 groups of boys in competition at a camp o Thought it was a summer camp but it was a 2 ½ week study of intergroup relations o these boys are “average” in nearly every respect: none had problems in school, all were from intact, middle-class families, and there were no notable ethnic group differences among them (none of them knew eachother beforehand) o divided into 2 groups of 11 and taken to separate areas of the park Bona Kim PSYC215 Chapter Summary Competition and Intergroup Conflict - in the 1 phase of the experiment: the 2 groups independently engages in activities designed to foster group unity (i.e. pitching tents, preparing meals, camp activities) o the Eagles and the Rattlers o a consistent hierarchal structure emerged within each group “effective initiators” nd - in the 2 phase, the Eagles and Rattlers were brought together for a 5-day tournament o baseball, touch football, treasure hunt…etc o the boys were told that each member of the winning team would receive a medal and a highly coveted pocket knife; members of the losing team would get nothing o designed to encourage each group to see the other as an impediment to the fulfillment of its own goals and hence, as a foe - intergroup hostility occurred (insults, food fights, raiding cabins, stealing and burning flags) - the internal dynamics of the 2 groups changed as they became involved in competitive struggle o boys who were either athletically gifted or who advocated a more aggressive stance toward the other group tended to fain in popularity o the initial leader of the Eagles had neither of these characteristics, and was essentially disposed by someone who was more athletic - investigators conducted a number of more tightly controlled assessments of how favourably the boys tended to look on members of their own group while derogating members of the other group o in one assessment, the investigators scattered a large quantity of beans around a field and asked the two groups to pick up as many as they could in 1 minute o before they announced the winner (reward of $5), an image of each boy’s image was projected on a wall, and everyone was asked to estimate the number of beans that the boy had collected o the same quantity of beans was always shown, but this was impossible to discern because it was only shown briefly o the boys’ estimates revealed clear in group favouritism: each group estimated that boys in their group had collected more beans than boys in the other group Reducing Intergroup Conflict through Superordinate Goals - the 3 phase: devoted to assessing ways to reduce the conflict between the 2 groups - the groups were brought together in various noncompetitive settings to see is the hostility would dissipate. It didn’t. Contact between them led to the same hostile activities - gave the boys with a number of crises that could be resolved only through the cooperative efforts of both groups o for example, the water supply of the camp was disrupted and the entire length of the pipe from the reservoir to the camp had to be inspected o a truck carrying supplies for a campout at a distant area broke down. The investigators left a large section of rope near the truck so they might use it to help get it started - when the groups were brought together in noncompetitive situations where they had to cooperate to achieve superordinate goals (goals that could achieved only when the two groups worked together) the hostility dissipated - what this experiment shows: o 1. neither differences in background nor differences in appearance not prior histories of conflict are necessary for intergroup hostility to develop  just need: 2 groups enter into competition for goals that only one can achieve o 2. competition against “outsiders” often increases group cohesion (this tendency is often exploited by political demagogues who invoke the specter of outside enemies to try to stamp out dissension or to deflect attention from problems or conflict within the group itself o 3. How intergroup conflict can be diminished by getting them to work together  To reduce the hostility that exists between certain groups, policy makers should think of ways to get them to work together to fulfill common goals. Pursuit of superordinate goals keeps people away from conflict Bona Kim PSYC215 Chapter Summary Evaluating the Economic Perspective - Different ethnic and religious groups in the military are in the equivalent of phase 3 of the Robbers Cave Experiment: purpose = to defend the U.S. against a common outside enemy - what implications do Sherif’s findings have for race and ethnic relations on college campuses? o Students have had close and sustained contact with members of other ethnic groups o the conditions of intergroup contact aren’t as favourable in the classroom as they are on the battlefield. o although students will assist their close friends to help them get higher grades, students rarely feel a cooperative bond with their classmates Box 11.1: Focus on Education - the “Jigsaw” Classroom - Eliot Aronson: developed a cooperative learning procedure to find out if a cooperative learning environment would improve academic performance and intergroup relations in integrated settings o Wanted to institute procedures that would unite students in the common goal of mastering a body of material, rather than competing for the highest grades o Came up with the “jigsaw” classroom  Students are divided into small groups of roughly 6 students each  Every effort s made to balance the groups in terms of ethnicity, gender, ability level, leadership etc.  The material on a given topic is then divided into 6 parts: each student is required to master one part and teach it to the others  By dividing the material in this way, Aronson ensured that no student could learn the entire lesson without help from peers  Each student’s material must fit together with everyone’s to learn the whole lesson - encourages students to work cooperatively toward a common goal  Members of different ethnic groups gain the experience of working with one another as individuals rather than as representatives of particular ethnic groups  Students in the jigsaw classrooms like school more and develop more positive attitudes toward different ethnic groups than students in traditional classes THE MOTIVATIONAL PERSPECTIVE - according to the motivational perspective, sometimes intergroup hostility can develop merely because another group exists, and an “us”/”them” opposition results The Minimal Group Paradigm - People’s readiness to adopt an “us/them” mentality even occurs in the minimal group paradigm (by Henri Tajfel) o Experimental setup in which researchers create groups based on arbitrary and seemingly meaningless criteria and then examine how the members of these “minimal groups” are inclined to behave toward one another o First step: participants randomly divided into 2 groups  People find out they are members of one group that have been defined in a trivial and arbitrary way (for example, “overestimators”/”underestimators”) o Participants are then taken individually to cubicles and are asked to assign points, redeemable for money, to successive pairs of their fellow participants  They don’t know the identity of those to whom they are awarding points  Only know a participant’s code number and group membership  They can choose:  1. Maximize what the ingroup member can receive but still result in more points for the members of the outgroup  2. Some maximize the relative ingroup advantage over the outgroup but don’t provide much in the way of absolte reward for members of the ingroup Bona Kim PSYC215 Chapter Summary - majority are interested more in maximizing the relative gain for members of their ingroup than in maximizing the absolute gain for their ingroup; tendency to favour their minimal ingroup o the participants don’t know who the ingroup or outgroup members are o the choices are never for themselves o the basis for establishing the two groups is trivial o they still exhibit a tendency to favour their minimal ingroup o they are willing to do so at the cost to the ingroup, which earns fewer points than it would if the focus were on absolute gain rather than “beating” the other group o that ingroup favouritism emerges in this contest shows how we slip into thinking in terms of us/them Social Identity Theory - Henri Tajfel and John Turner’s social identity theory: o attempts to explain ingroup favoritism, maintaining that self-esteem is derived not only from their personal identity and accomplishments but also from the status and accomplishments of the various groups to which they belong o Example: being an “American”, the pride associated with Bill of Rights, U.S. Economic and military clout, and accomplishments of American scientists, athletes, etc.  Also comes the shame associated with American slavery Boosting the Status of the Ingroup - since our self-esteem is based in part on the status of the various groups to which we belong, we might be tempted to do what we can to boost the status and fortunes of these groups and their members o powerful cause of ingroup favouritism: feeling better about the group leads us to feel better about ourselves o those who had been allowed to engage in intergroup discrimination had higher self- esteem than those who had not been given the opportunity to discriminate o people who take particularly strong pride in their group affiliations are more prone to ingroup favouritism when placed in a minimal group situation o people who are highly identified with a particular group react to criticism of the group as if it were criticism of the self Basking in Reflected Glory - the tendency for people to take pride in the accomplishments of those with whom they are in some way associated, as when fans identify with a winning team - Example: o sports fan chant: “we’re number 1” they want to be connected to the effort when the outcome is a victory but not after the loss o students wore the school colours significantly more often following victory than after defeat. “we” was used significantly more often after a win, and the more restrictive “they” was used more often after a loss  triumphs and failings of the groups with which we affiliate affect our self- esteem Derogating Outgroups to Bolster Self-Esteem - stereotyping and derogating members of outgroups appear to boost self-esteem o in one study, half the participants had their self-esteem threatened (told they had just performed poorly on an intelligence test) while the other half were told they did well  participants then watched a videotaped interview of a job applicant  the content of the video made it clear to half of the participants that the applicant was Jewish, but not the other half  participants were asked to rate the job applicant  among participants whose self-esteem has been threatened, those who thought she was jewish rated her more negatively than did those who were not told she was jewish  no difference was found among those whose self-esteem had not been threatened Bona Kim PSYC215 Chapter Summary - Lisa Sinclair and Ziva Kunda: o Non-black participants were either praised or criticized by a white or black doctor o Predicted that the participants would be motivated to cling to the praise they received but to challenge the criticism - and that they would use the race of their evaluator to help them do so. They thought that individuals:  who received praise from a black doctor would tend to think of him more as a doctor than as a black man  those who were criticized by a black doctor would tend to think of him more as a black man than as a doctor o had their participants perform a lexical decision task right after receiving their feedback from the doctor. They flashed a series of words and nonwords on a computer screen and asked the participants to indicate, as fast as they could, whether each string of letters was a word  some of the words were associated with the medical profession (hospital, prescription), and some were associated with common stereotypes of blacks (rap, jazz)  if the participants were thinking of their evaluator primarily as a doctor, they recognized the medical words faster (when they were praised)  if the participants were thinking of their evaluator primarily as a black man, they recognized the words associated with the black stereotype faster (when they were criticized) Frustration-Aggression Theory - frustration-aggression theory: theory that elaborates the idea that frustration leads to aggression o when people are frustrated in their attempt to reach a goal, they often lash out at less powerful individuals or groups - extending this idea to the study of prejudice and discrimination: people are particularly likely to vilify outgroups under conditions that foster frustration and anger o the theory is a good illustration of the sometimes blurry line between economic and motivational accounts of stereotyping and prejudice o if the source of frustration is the very group to which prejudice and discrimination are directed - if the outgroup members are perceived as getting in the way of the indvdl’s goals - frustration-aggression theory is both an economic and motivational account o sometimes the source of frustration is not the targeted group - it can be an overheated room or recalling an experience that elicited anger  in these cases, the motivation is not economic competition, and the two accounts diverge From Generalized to Targeted Aggression - often, we cannot lash out at the true source of frustration without getting into further difficulty so we displace out aggression onto a safer target o i.e. person denied a raise at work takes it out on the kids at home - frustration-aggression theory predicts that hardship will generate malevolence directed at minority groups that, by virtue of being outnumbered and in a weaker position, constitute particularly safe and vulnerable targets o anti-semitism: Jews have been welcomed and accepted but when times got tough, targeted them as scapegoats and directed their anger at the Jewish community - Carl Hovland and Robert Sears: examined the relationship between the price of cotton and the number of lynchings of blacks in the South between 1882-1930 o Cotton was really important to the Southern economy during this period o times were good and frustrations low when the price was high o times were tough and frustrations high when the price was low o strong negative correlation between the price of cotton in a given year and the number of lynchings that took place that year  lean times saw numerous lynchings; good times, relatively few Bona Kim PSYC215 Chapter Summary Evaluating the Motivational Perspective - motivational perspective builds on 2 important elements of the human condition: o 1. People readily draw the “us”/”them” distinction, and the various groups to which an individual belongs are intimately connected to the motive to enhance self-esteem o 2. People tend to react to frustration with aggression and often direct their aggression at the “safest” and least powerful targets in a given society - both motivational and economic perspectives have shown: o 1. How readily people will reward their own and penalize outsiders o 2. Both perspectives speak to how an unequal distribution of resources can sow the seeds of intergroup hostility o 3. Cognitive perspective THE COGNITIVE PERSPECTIVE - categorizing has a purpose: it simplifies the task of taking in and processing the incredible volume of stimuli that confronts us - according to the cognitive perspective, stereotypes are a natural result of the way our brains are wired to store and process information (stereotyping is inevitable) Stereotypes and the Conservation of Mental Reserves - the cognitive perspective focuses on stereotypes, which are a form of categorization. They are a useful cognitive categories that allow people to process information efficiently - people rely on them all the time, but especially when we’re tired or overtaxed (mentally) - In one study, students were shown to be more likely to invoke stereotypes when tested at the low point of their circadian rhythm o “morning people” when tested at night, were more likely to invoke a common stereotype and conclude for example, that a person charged with cheating on the exam was guilty if he was an athlete o “night people” when tested in the morning, were more likely to conclude that a person charged with dealing drugs was guilty is he was black
More Less

Related notes for PSYC 215

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.