Download Baron_Chapter6

Chapter 6
Prejudice: Its Causes, Effects,
and Cures
This multimedia product and its contents are protected under
copyright law. The following are prohibited by law:
• any public performance or display, including transmission of any
image over a network;
• preparation of any derivative work, including the extraction, in
whole or in part, of any images;
• any rental, lease, or lending of the program.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice: Its Causes, Effects, and Cures
• The Nature and Origins of Stereotyping,
Prejudice, and Discrimination
• Prejudice and Discrimination: Feelings
and Actions Toward Social Groups
• Why Prejudice Is Not Inevitable:
Techniques for Countering Its Effects
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Nature and Origins of Stereotyping, etc.
• Stereotyping: Beliefs About Social Groups
– Stereotypes—beliefs about social groups in terms of
the traits or characteristics that they are believed to
share
• These mental categories affect the processing of social
information.
– Gender Stereotypes—the traits possessed by females
and males, and that distinguish the two genders
from each other
• Contain both positive and negative traits and convey status
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Nature and Origins of Stereotyping, etc.
• Stereotypes and the “glass ceiling,” the barriers that
prevent qualified females from advancing to top-level
positions
– Female leaders tend to receive lower evaluations from their
subordinates compared to male leaders.
» Women who violate expectancies based on stereotypes are
likely to be rejected in male occupations.
» Women face greater obstacles than men do to achieve similar
levels of success.
– Men in traditionally female occupations do not face the glass
ceiling.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Nature and Origins of Stereotyping, etc.
• Consequences of token women in high places
– Tokenism can be an effective strategy for deterring protest by
disadvantaged groups.
» Tokens serve purpose of maintaining status quo
» It can be used as evidence that employers are not really
prejudiced and maintains perceptions that system is fair
– Being a token employee can be upsetting and damaging to selfesteem
» Tokens are perceived negatively by their coworkers
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Nature and Origins of Stereotyping, etc.
• Do targets agree with stereotypes of their group?
– Benevolent Sexism—suggests that women are superior to men
in various ways (e.g., they have better taste) and are necessary
for men’s happiness
» Women are more likely than men are to agree with these
ideas.
» Indicates tendency for low status groups to engage in social
creativity responses in the attempt to link positive qualities
to their group
» May serve to keep women in low-status positions
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Nature and Origins of Stereotyping, etc.
– Hostile Sexism—suggests that women are a threat to men’s
position (e.g., they are trying to seize power from men which
they are perceived as not deserving)
» Men report higher levels than do women
» Predicts negative stereotyping of women
– Countries with greater gender inequality are likely to have more
of both forms of sexism
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Nature and Origins of Stereotyping, etc.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Nature and Origins of Stereotyping, etc.
• Gender stereotypes and differential respect
– People may think that men deserve more respect due to the
higher positions they hold compared to women.
» This has consequences for discrimination against women in
the workplace.
• Are gender stereotypes accurate?
– Although some behavioral differences between males and
females exist, the degree of these differences is much smaller
than gender stereotypes suggest.
» Despite this, stereotypes continue to influence ratings people
give of men and women
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Nature and Origins of Stereotyping, etc.
• Why do People Form and Use Stereotypes?
– Stereotypes often act as schemas
• Their use saves cognitive effort and they serve motivational
purposes.
– How stereotypes operate
• They are easily accessible.
• They strongly affect how social information is processed.
– Information related to an activated stereotype is remembered better
– Stereotype-consistent information is more likely to be noticed
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Nature and Origins of Stereotyping, etc.
– Stereotype-inconsistent information, if noticed, often is refuted or
changed to make it appear consistent with the stereotype.
» People who do not fit their group’s stereotype are put in a
subtype and the stereotype is not changed.
• Stereotypes contribute to the formation of illusory
correlations, the perception of a stronger association
between two variables than actually exists.
– For example, white Americans overestimate the crime rates of
some minority groups.
» One explanation is that infrequent events stand out and are
easily noticed, especially when they confirm existing
stereotypes.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Nature and Origins of Stereotyping, etc.
– Another result of stereotype use
• Out-group homogeneity—members of an out-group
appear to be “all alike” or more similar to each other
than are members of the in-group
– In-group differentiation—members of own group are more
heterogeneous
– May be due to greater experience within one’s in-group and less
experience with members of other groups
– Its converse is the in-group homogeneity effect, which tends to
occur most commonly among minority group members who are
uniting to respond to perceived inequalities.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Nature and Origins of Stereotyping, etc.
– Do stereotypes ever change?
• Change may result when the relationships between groups
and corresponding behaviors change
• Change may result if in-group favoritism becomes socially
unacceptable
• Change may result when social values and group
memberships change since stereotypes justify unequal
social conditions
– For example, people with power are more likely to attend to
negative stereotypic information about members of subordinate
groups.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Nature and Origins of Stereotyping, etc.
• What are your thoughts?
– What are examples of traits that comprise gender
stereotypes (for women and for men)?
– Why don’t men typically face the same glass ceilings that
women do?
– What are the consequences of stereotyping for accurate
social perception?
• Would you like to be judged on the basis of a stereotype
about your group membership?
– Why or why not?
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
• Prejudice—negative attitudes toward members
of specific social groups
– People high in prejudice toward a certain group
tend to process information about that group
differently compared to information about other
groups.
• Information consistent with prejudiced attitudes is given
more attention and is remembered better
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
– When anger is the emotion underlying prejudice
toward a group, prejudiced people quickly
evaluate that group negatively when they are
angry.
• Incidental feelings (irrelevant to group) of anger can
generate automatic prejudiced responses toward outgroups.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
– Implicit prejudice can be automatically activated
and can affect overt behavior even though people
are unaware that they hold such views.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
• Origins of Prejudice
– Generally, perceptions of threat are involved.
• Threat to self-esteem or group interests
• Competition for scarce resources
• Self-categorization as a member of a group and
others as members of a different group
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
– Threat to self-esteem
• Holding prejudiced attitudes toward an out-group
allows people to increase their self-esteem when
they are feeling threatened.
– This tendency is strongest among those who think their
group’s interests are being threatened.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
– Competition for resources as a source of prejudice
• Realistic Conflict Theory (Bobo, 1983)—view that
prejudice stems from direct competition between various
social groups over scarce and valued resources
– As competition increases, prejudice increases
– Can be reduced if cooperation is necessary (superordinate goals
are introduced)
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
– Role of social categorization: The us-versus-them
effect
• People easily divide the social world into us (the in-group)
versus them (the out-group).
– People considered part of the ‘us’ category are thought of more
favorably than those in the ‘them’ category.
– This process affects the attributions people make.
» Ultimate Attribution Error—tendency to make more
favorable and flattering attributions about members of
one’s own group than about members of other groups,
which is the self-serving attribution bias at the group level
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
• How does social categorization result in prejudice?
– Social Identity Theory—concerned with the consequences of
perceiving the self as a member of a social group and
identifying with it
» One consequence is that self-esteem is involved with this
identification.
» A need to increase self-esteem can result in seeing other
groups as inferior to one’s own.
» When group members feel that their identity is being
threatened (perhaps because their identity is being combined
with another group’s), they tend to exhibit increased levels of
prejudice toward the other group.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
• Discrimination—differential (usually
negative) behaviors directed toward members
of different social groups
– While blatant discrimination has decreased, but
still does occur, subtle forms are common.
• Modern racism—more subtle beliefs than blatant
feelings of superiority, which consist primarily of
thinking minorities are seeking and receiving more
benefits than they deserve and a denial that
discrimination affects their outcomes
– Involves concealing prejudice until it is safe to express it
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
– Measuring implicit racial attitudes
• “Bogus Pipeline” procedure involves deceiving participants
by telling them that any lies they tell will be detected.
– Only useful for measuring explicit (not implicit) attitudes
• Most methods that measure implicit attitudes are based on
priming—using a stimulus to make accessible related
information in memory
– Bona fide pipeline—a technique that uses priming to measure
implicit racial attitudes
» People have implicit racial attitudes that are activated
automatically by members of ethnic groups and these attitudes
can influence behaviors expressed toward them.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
• Consequences of Exposure to Others’ Prejudice
– Exposure to prejudiced comments can make people
yield to conformity pressures and express prejudice
– Exposure can cue negative stereotypes
• People who hold prejudiced attitudes are more likely to
respond to being primed by others’ prejudice by
expressing prejudice themselves compared to people who
do not hold racist attitudes and people who hold
ambivalent racial attitudes.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
– Exposure to harmful actions of members of own
national group can raise collective guilt and
subsequent strategies to reduce it
• Argue that it is not the group as a whole that is
responsible (it is only a “few bad apples”)
• Minimize the magnitude of the harm done
• Legitimize the harm that was done
– Deny the possibility of collective responsibility
– Blame the victims by suggesting that they deserved being
harmed
• Perceive the abuse as serving the nation’s higher
aspirations
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Prejudice and Discrimination
• What are your thoughts?
– What are possible motivations behind prejudice?
• How does it originate in people?
– Can modern racism result in serious negative
consequences for groups toward which it is
expressed?
• If so, what are examples? If not, why not?
– What are examples of how the people of a nation
reduce their collective guilt in response to
information that members of their national group
engaged in harmful, prejudicial acts?
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Why Prejudice is Not Inevitable
• On Learning Not To Hate
– Social Learning View—prejudice is acquired
through direct and vicarious experiences in much the
same manner as other attitudes
• Children learn negative attitudes by hearing parents and
other significant others express them and then being
rewarded for adopting them.
– To combat, call parents’ attention to the illegitimacy of their
prejudiced views
– Remind parents of the high costs of holding prejudiced attitudes
» People high in prejudice enjoy everyday life less than others do.
• Direct experience with people of other groups also
influences attitudes.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Why Prejudice is Not Inevitable
• The Potential Benefits of Contact
– Contact Hypothesis—view that increased contact
between members of various social groups can
be effective in reducing prejudice between them
• Increased contact can decrease prejudice by increasing
familiarity and reducing anxiety.
• Positive contact that involves cooperation and
interdependence between groups can result in the
adoption of egalitarian social norms and the reduction
of prejudice.
– In fact, simply learning that members of one’s in-group have
formed friendships with out-group members can decrease
prejudice.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Why Prejudice is Not Inevitable
• Recategorization—shifts in the boundaries
between an in-group and some out-group
– People in a former out-group now belong to the
in-group and are viewed more favorably.
– Common In-group Identity Model—suggests that
to the extent individuals in different groups view
themselves as members of a single social entity,
intergroup bias will be reduced
• This can happen when groups work together to
accomplish shared goals.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Why Prejudice is Not Inevitable
• The Benefits of Guilt for Prejudice Reduction
– Collective guilt—can be experienced when people are
confronted with the harmful actions done by their ingroup against an out-group, and is more likely when
actions are seen as illegitimate
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Why Prejudice is Not Inevitable
• Can People Learn to Say “No” to Stereotypes?
– People can learn to rely less on stereotypes by
repeatedly negating them.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Why Prejudice is Not Inevitable
• Social Influence as a Way to Reduce Prejudice
– People’s racial attitudes are affected by social
influence.
• Lowering the in-group’s endorsement of prejudice can
reduce prejudice in bigoted people.
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon
Why Prejudice is Not Inevitable
• What are your thoughts?
– How can parents who are not prejudiced make sure
that their children do not learn to be prejudiced
through their interactions with people who are
bigoted?
– What are ways to increase contact between groups?
• What characteristics should this increased contact have?
– Which strategies to reduce prejudice seem plausible
and which seem difficult to implement?
• Why?
Copyright 2006, Allyn and Bacon