Prejudicestudent

Lecture Outline : Lecture Outline Prejudice


Prejudice : Prejudice Definition: A positive or negative attitude, belief, or feeling about a person generalized from attitudes, beliefs, or feelings about the person’s group.


Components of Prejudice : Components of Prejudice Stereotypic beliefs typical attributes Symbolic beliefs values, traditions, customs Emotions affective reactions (e.g., disgust)


Theories of Racism : Theories of Racism Old Fashioned Racism Modern (Symbolic) Racism


Old Fashioned Racism : Old Fashioned Racism Premise: People are consciously aware they are racist, but may conceal that from others.


Examples of Self-Report Measures of Prejudice : Examples of Self-Report Measures of Prejudice Old Fashioned Racism Scale Generally speaking, do you feel blacks are smarter, not as smart, or about as smart as whites? If a black family with about the same income and education as you moved next door, would you mind it a lot, a little or not at all?


Modern (Symbolic) Racism : Modern (Symbolic) Racism Premise: People feel ambivalent toward the stigmatized – torn between the egalitarian values they truly hold and the racism they harbor.


Modern (Symbolic) Racism : Modern (Symbolic) Racism Theory proposes that…. People deal with their ambivalence by letting it come out in disguised form – as support for conservative American values.


Examples of Self-Report Measures of Prejudice : Examples of Self-Report Measures of Prejudice Modern Racism Scale Over the past few years, blacks have gotten more economically than they deserve Blacks are getting too demanding in their push for equal rights


Self-Reported Prejudice : Self-Reported Prejudice General pattern: Prejudice is subsiding


Explanations : Explanations People are less prejudiced now Social Desirability


Social Desirability : Social Desirability People lie about their prejudiced to appear unbiased to others


Bogus Pipeline : Bogus Pipeline An experimental paradigm Experimenter claims to have access (a pipeline) to participants’ true reactions


Bogus Pipeline StudySigall & Page (1971) : Participants seated in front of machine w/steering wheel attached Bogus Pipeline Study Sigall & Page (1971)


Bogus Pipeline StudySigall & Page (1971) : Completed survey about self Rated African Americans on traits by turning wheel -3 (very uncharacteristic) +3 (very characteristic) Bogus Pipeline Study Sigall & Page (1971)


Bogus Pipeline StudySigall & Page (1971) : Bogus Pipeline Study Sigall & Page (1971) Manipulation Bogus pipeline group Control group


Bogus Pipeline StudySigall & Page (1971) : If people lie on self-report measures to appear unbiased then…. Attributes Negative Positive Bogus Pipeline > Control Control > Bogus Pipeline Bogus Pipeline Study Sigall & Page (1971)


Bogus Pipeline StudySigall & Page (1971) : Neg. Attributes Bogus Pipeline Control Happy-go-lucky .93 -.13 Ignorant .60 .20 Stupid .13 -1.00 Physically dirty .20 -1.33 Unreliable .27 -.67 Lazy .60 -.73 Aggressive 1.20 .67 Bogus Pipeline Study Sigall & Page (1971)


Bogus Pipeline StudySigall & Page (1971) : Pos. Attributes Bogus Pipeline Control Intelligent .00 .47 Ambitious .07 .33 Sensitive .87 1.60 Bogus Pipeline Study Sigall & Page (1971)


Explicit and Implicit Prejudice : Explicit and Implicit Prejudice Explicit Measures Implicit Measures Responses more easily modified


Explicit and Implicit Prejudice : Explicit and Implicit Prejudice Explicit Measures Implicit Measures More vulnerable to social desirability


Taxonomy of prejudice measures Maass, Castelli & Arcuri (2000) : Taxonomy of prejudice measures Maass, Castelli & Arcuri (2000) Controlling Responses Easy Difficult


IAT: Implicit Association Test : IAT: Implicit Association Test The IAT measures RT: how quickly people categorize stimulus words. Faster RT = stronger association IAT responses correlate mildly with explicit responses


Realistic Group Conflict Theory : Realistic Group Conflict Theory Competition between groups causes prejudice & intergroup conflict


Slide25 : Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981) Examined whether racial prejudice stems from: competition over scarce resources (realistic group conflict theory) belief that African Americans violate cherished values (symbolic/modern racism)


Slide26 : Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981) Mayoral elections in Los Angeles: 1969 and 1973


Slide27 : Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981) Election Results: 1969: Samuel Yorty won with 53% of vote 1973: Thomas Bradley won with 56% of vote


Slide28 : Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981) Scarce Resources Prediction If racial prejudice stems from competition over scarce resources, then... Whites who are in greater competition for resources with African Americans should be more prejudiced than those who are in less competition.


Slide29 : Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981) Symbolic Racism Prediction If racial prejudice stems from symbolic racism, then..... The more strongly Whites believe that African Americans violate traditional values, the more prejudice they will show.


Slide30 : Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981) White residents of Los Angeles, CA 1969 (n = 198); 1973 (n = 239) Most lived in suburbs Homeowners 33% attended college Most were Protestant, others Catholic Nearly all were married Most had children Prejudice = Voting behavior Participants:


Slide31 : Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981) Competition over scarce resources: Measured via questionnaire responses spanning four domains of racial threat.....


Slide32 : Domains of Racial Threat 1. Interracial social contact Example Question How strongly would you object if a member of your family wanted to bring an African American friend home to dinner Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981)


Slide33 : Domains of Racial Threat 2. Economic competition Example Question Have the economic gains of African Americans been about the same, much greater than, greater than, or less than yours over the past 5 years? Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981)


Slide34 : Domains of Racial Threat 3. Racial Busing Example Question How likely is it that African American children will be bused into the elementary schools of this neighborhood? Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981)


Slide35 : Domains of Racial Threat 4. Perception of violence committed by African Americans Example Question How likely is it that African Americans will bring violence to this neighborhood? Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981)


Slide36 : Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981) Symbolic Racism: Measured via questionnaire responses spanning two domains of value systems...


Slide37 : Domains of Value Systems 1. Expressive Racism Example Question Do you think that most African Americans who receive money from welfare programs could get along without it if they tried or do they really need the help? Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981)


Slide38 : Domains of Value Systems 2. Opposition to racial busing Example Question Busing elementary school children to schools in other parts of the city only harms their education Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981)


Slide39 : Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981) Only symbolic racism significantly explained voting behavior


Mayor's Race StudyKinder & Sears (1981) : Mayor's Race Study Kinder & Sears (1981) Symbolic (modern) racism disguised as endorsement of conservative values Enables symbolic racists to believe they are non-prejudiced, while still supporting political positions that favor Whites over African Americans


Slide41 : Aversive Racism People feel ambivalence toward the stigmatized Similar to symbolic/modern racism in this respect


Slide42 : Aversive Racism Aversive racism differs from symbolic/modern racism in three ways: They believe racism is more wrong. Their prejudice comes out in subtle ways – not as support for conservative values. More aware of their racism.


Slide43 : Feel ambivalence toward the stigmatized Not typically conscious of prejudice Endorse liberal values Strongly believe racism is wrong Symbolic Racism Aversive Racism Feel ambivalence toward the stigmatized Not conscious of prejudice Endorse conservative values Believe racism is wrong


Slide44 : Ambivalence-Amplification Theory People are ambivalent toward the stigmatized. aversion and hostility sympathy and compassion


Causes of Prejudice:Cultural Norms : Causes of Prejudice: Cultural Norms Cultural Norms Comfort expressing prejudice Protected Status


Protected Status : Protected Status


Measures of Protected Status : Measures of Protected Status Denial of prejudice Willingness to derogate publicly


Denial of Prejudice StudyCrandall (1994) : Denial of Prejudice Study Crandall (1994) Purpose: Examined denial of prejudice against African Americans & obese


Denial of Prejudice Study Crandall (1994) : Denial of Prejudice Study Crandall (1994) 2,406 participants Modern Racism Scale Measures prejudice against African Americans Dislike Scale Measures prejudice against the obese


Denial of Prejudice Study Crandall (1994) : Denial of Prejudice Study Crandall (1994) Percent Disavowing Prejudice Against: African Americans 10% Obese 3%


Slide51 : Derogation Study Smith (2001) Purpose: Examine willingness to derogate various stigmatized groups


Slide52 : Derogation Study Smith (2001) Participants indicated: How comfortable they personally feel saying or thinking bad things about 41 different groups


Slide53 : Derogation Study Smith (2001) Some of the groups rated: people with acne white supremacists people with AIDS schizophrenics amputees homosexuals the blind child abusers people with ADHD pedophiles alcoholics gamblers murderers adulterers


Derogation Study Smith (2001) : Most Comfortable homosexuals prostitutes child abusers Least Comfortable cancer patients People w/leukemia paralyzed people Derogation Study Smith (2001) Willingness to derogate varied across the stigmas


Slide55 : Ambivalence-Amplification Theory Proposes that... 1. Ambivalence causes threat to self-esteem No matter how one feels, that feeling is in conflict with the other way one feels


Slide56 : Ambivalence-Amplification Theory Proposes that... 2. People try to reduce threats to self-esteem They justify or deny the way the feel at the moment, depending on the situation


Slide57 : Ambivalence-Amplification Theory Proposes that... 3. Behavior toward the stigmatized is very unstable 4. People are aware of their ambivalence


Slide58 : Justify/Deny Prejudice Studies Katz & Glass (1979) Examined how the situation sometimes leads people to justify and other times to deny their prejudice


Slide59 : Prediction: People will justify prejudice against a stigmatized other if the situation encourages that response Justify Prejudice Study Katz & Glass (Study 1, 1979)


Slide60 : Procedure: 1. Male participants rated confederate on 20 item impression questionnaire liking warmth conceit intelligence adjustment Justify Prejudice Study Katz & Glass (Study 1, 1979)


Slide61 : Procedure: 2. Participant administered shock to confederate as feedback 3. Participant evaluated confederate 2nd time on impression questionnaire Justify Prejudice Study Katz & Glass (Study 1, 1979)


Slide62 : Manipulations: 1. Confederate’s race: African American White 2. Shock level: (no shock actually given) strong and painful weak and not painful Justify Prejudice Study Katz & Glass (Study 1, 1979)


Slide63 : Prediction Restated: People justify prejudice by denigrating stigmatized others who they have harmed. This makes those people seem unworthy and deserving of the harm. This means: Participants who gave “strong shocks” to the African American target should rate him most negatively after the shock relative to their initial ratings. Justify Prejudice Study Katz & Glass (Study 1, 1979)


Slide64 : Negative change = more negative impression after shock Positive change = more positive impression after shock As predicted, impression of African American confederate became most negative after strong shock


Slide65 : Deny Prejudice Study Katz & Glass (Study 2, 1979) Prediction: People will deny prejudice against a stigmatized other if the situation encourages that response


Slide66 : 1. Participant introduced to confederate 2. Participant required to insult confederate 3. Told confederate left before criticism was explained as part of the experiment 4. Participant believed experiment was over 5. Sent to office for $, where got letter from confederate..... Deny Prejudice Study Katz & Glass (Study 2, 1979)


Slide67 : Doing an independent study project Needed one more participant to finish up Study was on repetition Experimental materials attached Materials asked participant to repetitively write the same sentence over and over The letter: Deny Prejudice Study Katz & Glass (Study 2, 1979)


Slide68 : Deny Prejudice Study Katz & Glass (Study 2, 1979) Manipulations: 1. Confederate race: African American White 2. Insult level: Very hurtful Not very hurtful


Slide69 : Prediction Restated: People will deny prejudice by going out of their way to help a stigmatized other whom they have harmed. This means: Participants who gave “hurtful insult” to the African American target should work the hardest in the repetitive experiment. Deny Prejudice Study Katz & Glass (Study 2, 1979)


Slide70 : Values are the average number of times repetitive sentence was written in booklet. As predicted, participants wrote the sentence more often after having harmed the African American target.


Justify/Deny Prejudice StudiesKatz & Glass (1979) : Conclusion: People feel ambivalence toward stigmatized others People respond in extreme ways toward those whom they have harmed Sometimes behave negatively, sometimes positively depending on the situation Justify/Deny Prejudice Studies Katz & Glass (1979)