Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

Personality & social > Improving intergroup relations > Flashcards

Improving intergroup relations Flashcards

1
Q

What was the Rwandan genocide?

A
  • 100-day civil war in 1994 between Hutu & Tutsi

- mass slaughter of Tutsi & moderate Hutu by Hutu majority (500,000-1,000,000 Tutsi deaths)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is the Israel-Palestine conflict about?

A
  • borders, water rights, control of Jerusalem

- since 2000, 1,000+ Israel deaths & 9,000+ Palestinian deaths

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Negative intergroup relations are a destructive force of extreme prejudice & conflict.

What are some less extreme but more pervasive effects of prejudice?

A
  • hate crimes

- discrimination towards low-power groups in society

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What are some negative effects of prejudice on target groups?

A
  • self-fulfilling prophecies
  • stereotype threat
  • self-esteem
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What did Jussim & Harber (2005) find about SFPs & prejudice?

A

Jussim & Harber (2005) – SFPs occur in classrooms but effects are usually small; powerful SFPs may occur amongst students from stigmatised groups

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What did Steele & Aronson (1995) find about stereotype threat & prejudice?

A

Steele & Aronson (1995) - culturally-shared stereotypes that suggest poor performance of certain groups can disrupt the performance of a person who identifies with that group

African Americans did worse on a verbal exam than Whites in the stereotype threat condition (told that the test indicated their underlying intellectual abilities) but performance was the same in the non-threat condition (not diagnostic of ability)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What did Hogg (1985) find out about self-esteem & prejudice?

A

Hogg (1985) - women generally share men’s negative stereotypes of women & evaluate themselves in terms of such stereotypes
Under circumstances where gender is the salient bias of self-perception, women report a reduction in self-esteem

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What are the models of categorisation?

A
  1. Decategorisation
  2. Cross categorisation
  3. Recategorisation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What component is essential in the formation of prejudice?

A

Categorisation (group distinctions)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Who proposed the model of decategorisation?

A

Brewer & Miller (1988)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What is the basis of decategorisation?

A

Group categories are abandoned & people are encouraged to think of others in an interpersonal context (rather than intergroup)

There is a focus on personal/individual features

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Bettencourt et al. (1992) separated pps into 2 groups (each wore different badges)

  • decategorisation group focused on the personal features of the task (interpersonal)
  • control group focused on the task (intergroup)

Groups worked together on the task, what did they find?

A

Bettencourt et al. (1992) - the decategorisation group showed reduced intergroup bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What are the limitations of the decategorisation model?

A

X not possible for visibly distinct groups (e.g. race, gender) (Simon, Aufderheide & Kampmeier, 2001)

X real-life social identities are important for our self-definition –> people are usually unwilling to relinquish them (Tajfel & Turner, 1979)

X positive effects towards individual members aren’t likely to be generalised to the who out-group (individual isn’t viewed as an out-group member) = subtyping

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Wilder (1984) studied subtyping. What is it?

A

Subtyping is when perceivers respond to members of a target group who disconfirm their stereotypes by seeing them as exceptions to the rule & placing them in a separate subcategory away from members who confirm the stereotype

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What did Hewstone & Brown (1986) say is necessary for the generalisation of positive effects (from the individual to the whole group)?

A

Hewstone & Brown (1986) – some level of category salience/awareness is necessary for generalisation of the positive effects to the whole out-group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What is the basis of cross categorisation?

A

Our social identities are made of many group memberships

People are encouraged to think of out-group members in terms of how similar they are to us on other category dimensions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Give an example of cross categorisation

A

Female / male
Psychology / business

If you are FP = double in-group
If you are MB = double out-group
–> simple categorisation

FB & MP = one in-group dimension
–> cross categorisation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Which researcher/s studied boys & girls given red & blue pens?
What did they do/find?

A

Deschamps & Doise (1978)

Boys & girls sat around a table
Half were given red pens, half given blue pens (crossed gender & pen-colour categories)
Pps rated in-group & out-group (gender) performance

Found that simple categorisation = intergroup bias; cross categorisation = reduced intergroup bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What is a limitation of cross categorisation?

A

Potentially problematic for the double out-group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Who proposed recategorisation as a way of reducing prejudice?

A

Gaertner et al. (1993)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What is the basis of recategorisation (Gaertner et al., 1993)?

A

The model seeks to alter which categorisations are used & replace subordinate (‘us’ ‘them’) categorisations with superordinate (‘we’) categorisations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

How does the recategorisation model say we can reduce intergroup bias?

A

Bias is reduced by improving attitudes towards former out-group members, owing to their recategorisation from out-group to in-group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

How is intergroup bias often expressed, according to Gaertner et al. (1993)?

A

Intergroup bias is often expressed as in-group favouritism rather than out-group derogation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

How can out-group members be viewed more positively, according to the recategorisation model?

A

If out-group members are perceived as in-group members, they will be viewed more positively

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
There is supporting evidence for the effectiveness of the recategorisation model. Give an example.
Dovidio et al. (1995) found that pps who had stronger superordinate representations showed less intergroup bias
26
Gaertner et al. (1989) also found support for recategorisation. What did their study involve?
Pps did a problem-solving task as either... a) 2 groups (A vs. B) - segregated seating (aaabbb) b) 1 group (A & B) - integrated seating (ababab) c) individuals Pps had to evaluate each member
27
What did Gaertner et al. (1989) find in their study of recategorisation?
There was greater intergroup bias when pps worked in 2 different teams (A vs. B) - no competition, just a lack of cooperation/superordinate identity There was reduced intergroup bias in the 1 group (superordinate) condition When working as individuals, they perceived others as individuals
28
Dovidio et al. (1997) found that intergroup relations are likely to improve over time, rather than immediately. Why is this the case?
Intergroup relations improve gradually as positive biases associated with a new superordinate group membership encourage more self-disclosing interactions with former out-group members This leads to more differentiated impressions of them
29
What are the limitations of recategorisation?
X Brewer & Gaertner (2001) - a common in-group identity may only be short-lived or unrealistic in the face of powerful ethical & racial categorisations X threatens to deprive individuals of valued social identities in smaller, less inclusive groups X Brewer (2000) - for groups with a history of antagonism & for minorities who are likely to resist assimilation into a superordinate category that is dominated by an out-group, the prospect of a superordinate group identity may constitute a threat & increase their levels of intergroup bias
30
Why might recategorisation threaten to deprive individuals of their social identities? What might result?
By eradicating/replacing original categorisations, the model is unlikely to meet the needs of assimilation & differentiation, or of cognitive simplicity & uncertainty reduction
31
Brewer (2000) - people who identify strongly with their in-group view superordinate categorisation as...
...a threat to in-group positive distinctiveness --> increases intergroup bias explained by Social Identity theory
32
Who proposed intergroup contact as a method of improving intergroup relations?
Allport (1954)
33
What did Pettigrew & Tropp (2008) define intergroup contact as?
Face-to-face interaction between members of different groups
34
According to Allport (1954), contact between opposing group members should reduce prejudice as long as prerequisites are in place. What are they?
- institutional support - cooperation to achieve common goals - free from competition - equal status between contact members
35
What attitudes can be improved/reduced as a result of intergroup contact?
- race (e.g. Plant & Devine, 2003) - sexual orientation (e.g. Herek & Captitanio, 1996) - age (e.g. Drew, 1988) - mental & physical disability (e.g. Anderson, 2006)
36
Contact is a highly robust & effective method of reducing prejudice even without Allport’s prerequisites, but it is most effective when these facilitating conditions are in place. Who found this?
Pettigrew & Tropp (2006)
37
Who found that intergroup contact has a weaker effect with individuals in minority groups?
Tropp & Pettigrew (2005)
38
Contact improves intergroup attitudes & behaviours, & reduces stereotyping by…
- increasing empathy towards the out-group (Swart et al., 2010) - encouraging perspective-taking (Hewstone et al., 2006) - enhancing feelings of trust towards the out-group (Tam et al., 2009) - reducing intergroup anxiety & threat (Stephan & Stephan, 2000)
39
What does Stephan & Stephan (1985) claim is a limitation of intergroup contact?
We will experience intergroup anxiety, especically if we have had minimal contact with the out-group before, hold negative beliefs about the out-group &/or if interaction is unstructured (--> increased ambiguity)
40
What other limitations of intergroup contact are there?
X intergroup arousal can have a negative impact - arousal is generalised to the target of the interaction & leads to increased prejudice & avoidance of the out-group (Stephan et al., 2005) X opportunity for direct contact isn’t always available (e.g. people in highly segregated areas, often only associate with other like-minded people)
41
What is intergroup anxiety?
Negative arousal when anticipating/experiencing contact with an out-group member Arousal associated with the out-group, leading to prejudice
42
What can result from positive contact with an out-group member?
Positive contact with the out-group member → anxiety associated with the out-group is reduced → attitudes towards the out-group are improved → reduced prejudice
43
Protestants & Catholics in Northern Ireland did a questionnaire - reported the number of out-group friends they had & their feelings towards the out-group Who did this study & what did they find?
Paolini et al. (2004) Cross-group friendships reduced intergroup anxiety & improved their attitudes towards the out-group
44
How do Sherif & Sherif's (1953) Robber's Cave studies relate to intergroup anxiety?
Intergroup events did not improve intergroup relations but served as occasions for rival groups to attack & berate each other
45
Allport (1954) looked at unpublished data about anti-Black sentiment amongst White people living in Chicago. What did he find?
There was a correlation between proximity & anti-Black attitudes --> prejudice towards the Black community INCREASED with greater residential proximity i.e. more prejudice the nearer they were
46
Who proposed the Extended Contact hypothesis?
Wright et al. (1997)
47
What is the basis of the Extended Contact hypothesis?
Mere knowledge of positive cross-group relationships should reduce negative expectations about future interactions with the out-group & reduce prejudice
48
What is a pro of the Extended Contact hypothesis?
It doesn't require actual interaction – a person can learn about intergroup contact without experiencing anxiety involved in direct contact
49
Wright et al. (1997) created intergroup conflict between 2 groups. One person from each group did a cooperative task together & then discussed their experience with their in-group. What happened?
This reduced intergroup conflict & bias
50
How can social media be related to the extended contact hypothesis?
Shared photos, posts & statuses are opportunities for extended contact Knowledge of other people’s cross-group friendships
51
Which researchers have found support for the extended contact hypothesis?
- Turner et al. (2008) - Paolini et al. (2004) - Liebkind & McAllister (1999)
52
How does Turner et al.'s (2008) study support the extended contact hypothesis?
Turner et al. (2008) surveyed White students about their experiences with & attitudes towards South Asians Pps reported their degree of extended contact with this group, their experience of intergroup anxiety & their attitude towards the out-group Found that extended contact was associated with more positive out-group attitudes
53
How does Paolini et al.'s (2004) study support the extended contact hypothesis?
Paolini et al. (2004) - Protestants & Catholics in Northern Ireland did a questionnaire - reported the number of out-group friends they had & their feelings towards the out-group Found that knowledge of cross-group friendships improved attitudes towards the out-group
54
How does Liebkind & McAllister's (1999) study support the extended contact hypothesis?
Found that extended contact was effective amongst children & teens in improving attitudes towards the out-group
55
What other pros of extended contact are there?
Extended contact overcomes issues with direct contact (especially intergroup anxiety)
56
Who proposed imagined contact as a method of improving intergroup relations?
Crisp & Turner (2009)
57
What is the basis of imagined contact?
Imagining positive contact with an out-group member will have similar (but less powerful) effects as direct contact
58
How did Turner, Crisp & Lambert (2007) study imagined contact?
Experiment 1: Imagined contact group (imagined a positive encounter with an elderly stranger) vs. control group (imagined an outdoor scene) --> found that both groups were willing to work with a young & elderly person on a subsequent task, but the control group showed intergroup bias with a preference for working with young person & the experimental group showed NO bias/preference Experiment 2: Replicated the positive effect of imagined contact with homosexual out-group --> heterosexual males evaluated homosexual mates more positively after imagined contact
59
What are the positive effects of imagined contact, according to Turner & Crisp (2009)?
Turner & Crisp (2009) - improved explicit & implicit attitudes
60
What are the positive effects of imagined contact, according to Turner et al. (2007)?
Turner et al. (2007) - reduced intergroup anxiety
61
What are the positive effects of imagined contact, according to Turner & West (2012)?
Turner & West (2012) - improved intergroup behaviours (seating proximity)
62
In which population did Miles & Crisp (2014) find that imagined contact had the most positive effect?
Miles & Crisp (2014) - especially strong effects in school children
63
Turner & Crisp (2009) proposed imagined contact as a preparatory measure to...
...encourage active pursuit & a positive experience of direct contact
64
What other pros of imagined contact are there?
It overcomes issues of other forms of contact - no need for opportunity - little intergroup anxiety
65
What is a limitation of imagined contact?
Its effects aren't as powerful as for direct contact
66
Which researcher/s support the findings that the effects of imagined contact aren't as powerful as for direct contact?
Fazio, Powell & Herr (1983)
67
Who has found evidence that imagined contact does have similar effects to direct contact, but stress that it should be used as a preparatory measure (not a replacement for direct contact)?
Giacobbe, Stukas & Farhall (2013)
68
Stephan & Stephan (1984) claim that prejudice is partly based on...
...ignorance
69
How can education reduce prejudice?
By promoting tolerance
70
Why have some techniques only produced small effects in reducing prejudice in children?
They treat the child as a passive receiver of info rather than having an active role
71
Who claimed that imagined contact could be used as an intervention in schools?
Miles & Crisp (2014) Imagined contact has been found to be especially effective in school children Children would play an active role
72
Elliot (1977) gave children the opportunity to experience being a victim of prejudice & discrimination. What happened?
When children had the opportunity to experience prejudice & discrimination, their prejudice levels reduced

Personality & social (12 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions