Inter-group Relations Flashcards

1
Q

Bondenhausen (1990)

A

‘Morning people’ tested at night and ‘night people’ tested at morning were more likely to fall back on stereotypes when making a judgement

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

Stereotype

A

The belief that certain attributes are characteristic of members of a particular group

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

Prejudice

A

Prejudice is a negative attitude or affective response toward a group and its individual members.

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

Discrimination

A

Discrimination is unfair treatment of individuals based on their membership in a particular group.

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

Modern racism

A

Modern racism is prejudice directed at racial groups that exists alongside the rejection of explicitly racist beliefs.

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

What are the theoretical perspectives of intergroup relations?

A

There are three main causal perspectives of group relations according to Gilovich et al (2016), of which Hewstone et al (2015) split into two categories of individual and group level explanations.

The group level explanations are economic (competing interests) and motivational (psychological needs).

The individual level explanations are cognitive (schemas and peoples conflicting beliefs with automatic responses) and personality which is unique to Hewstone.

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

Realistic group conflict theory

A

Suggests that when groups are competing for the same limited resource they develop prejudices and discriminate against each other.

This theory predicts that ethnocentrism will also develop which refers to glorifying one’s own group while vilifying other groups. This results in in-group loyalty intensifying with a “circle the wagon” mentality.

(Economic)

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

Sherif et al (1961)

A

Used 22 average boys, similar in background ethnicity and education and randomly split them into two groups at summer camp.

Initially they didn’t know about other group and cohesion developed.

Then 5 day tournament between them resulted in insults, vandalism and fighting. Leaders replaced with more athletic/aggressive others.

Interacting in non competitive settings didn’t reduce hostility but when given crisis that required combined effort (superordinate goals) and hostility declined and cooperation afterwards persisted.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What did the Robbers cave study show?

A

Demonstrated that differences in background, appearance or history of conflict are necessary for intergroup conflict to develop.

Simply competing for goals that only one can achieve, and in this case not even a necessity.

The study also highlights the importance of common goals in reducing intergroup conflict and improving cooperation.

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

What is the minimal group paradigm?

A

Tajfel’s minimal group paradigm is an experimental paradigm 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 each other.

Results often show that most people are concerned with maximising the relative gain of in-group compared to the absolute gain.

(Motivational)

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

What is the social identity theory?

A

The idea that a person’s self-concept and self-esteem derive not only from personal identity and accomplishments but also from the status and accomplishments of the various groups to which a person belongs.

Therefore people have the tendency to favour their in-group and boost it’s status to feel better about themselves.

People also go to great lengths to announce affiliation to a group that is doing well e.g sports, which is known as basking in reflected glory. On the flip side denigrating out-groups can also boost self-esteem.

(Motivational)

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

Schemas and stereotypes

A

Stereotyping is inevitable due to out necessity to categorise things into schemas.

It simplifies the task of processing the world in what would otherwise be overwhelming and confusing.

We are inclined to use stereotypes to save cognitive resources when we’re overloaded, tired or mentally taxed.

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

Negatives of stereotypes

A

Stereotypes can have negative effects too as people from working class backgrounds will have less expected and demanded of them which consequently reinforces the stereotype that they achieve less academically.

Similarly stereotypes lacking validity can lead to confirmation through biased observations.

These kinds of mistakes are results of other construal processes that help form schemas.

Dividing a continuous distribution into two groups leads people to see less variability within each group and more between them. This can be useful for categories based on personality, religion or interests but not when based on arbitrary details such as skin colour and weight

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

Out-group homogeneity effect

A

Is the tendency for people to assume that within-group similarity is much stronger for out-groups than in-groups.

This may partly be down to lack of interactions with a diverse amount fo people from the out-group but also the nature of interactions is likely to be different, we treat them as a representative of their group which we don’t with in-group members.

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

Illusory correlation

A

People sometimes see correlations between events, characteristics, or categories that are not actually related

This can result from paying more attention to unusual or distinctive events, which then becomes over represented in memory.

Minority groups are distinctive to the majority and so pairing with distinctive or negative behaviour can result in a strong association. Positive behaviour from minority groups and negative behaviour from majority groups are therefore less distinct which is problematic.

The media also plays a role as they tend to show the most extreme members of minority groups.

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

Self-fulfilling prophecies

A

Self-fulfilling prophecies mean that people act towards members of groups that encourage the very behaviour they expect.

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

How people respond to stereotype disconfirmation

A

Depends on emotional investment, whether it’s idiosyncratic or widely shared etc

But people won’t give them up easily.

Sub typing refers to explaining away exceptions to a given stereotype by creating a cub category of the stereotyped group that can be expected to differ from the group as a whole.

This shows a bias in processing of evidence (links to social cognition series) known as the self-serving attributional bias.

We can also differentiate processing of evidence in terms of how concretely or abstractly we encode actions of people.

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

Automatic vs controlled

A

There is a distinction between conscious processes such as sub typing and unconscious processes like the illusory correlations and the out-group homogeneity effect.

There is often conflict between people’s knowledge of stereotypes which can be activated unconsciously (out of control) and their beliefs and attitudes towards the group which is conscious.

Research has shown that explicit measures of prejudice are often a good predictor of controlled behaviour and implicit measures of automatic behaviour. Correll et al used a simulation where participants had to shoot if a person was armed or not and found they made the mistake of shooting an unarmed black person more than white.

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

The contact hypothesis

A

The straightforward idea that brining together students of different races and ethnicities would reduce prejudice and discrimination but most studies show this results in an increase.

According to Alpert (1954) contact between groups is more likely to be successful in reducing hostility if they have equal status, a superordinate goal, a community with supportive and cooperative norms, and contact that encourages 1 on 1 interactions between members of different groups.

20
Q

Little et al (2007)

A

Used a composite image of multiple faces merged and morphed it to appear more masculine or feminine, people said they preferred the masculine for leader in time of war and feminine in time of peace

21
Q

Van Vugt & Spisak (2008)

A

People prefer a female leader intra group conflict (within) and male for inter- group conflict.

22
Q

Levine and Campbell (1972)

A

Prejudice and discrimination increase during economic hardship

23
Q

Simpson and Yinger (1985)

A

Prejudice increase in working class whites against blacks as they stand to lose the most

24
Q

Dovidio et al (2004)

A

Telling white students 9/11 was directed at all Americans reduced prejudice towards blacks

25
Q

Tajifel et al (1971)

A

Assigned group based on painting preference and have to allocate real rewards without personal gain

Although many adopt fairness strategy there was more maximum differentiation than maximum in group profit

26
Q

Lemyre and Smith (1985)

A

After having opportunity to exhibit in- group favouritism self esteem increased compared to those who hadn’t

27
Q

Cialdini et al (1976)

A

Students wearing school colours higher following victory than defeat

28
Q

Fein and Spencer (1997)

A

Half told they performed poorly or well on IQ test (threaten self esteem) then watched a video of job applicant (half told she was Jewish and half not) they rated her more negatively in Jewish condition if self esteem was threatened and showed increase in self esteem.

29
Q

Sinclar and Kunda (1999)

A

Non black participants either praised or criticised by white or black doctor

Then given a lexical decision task including words related to doctors or black people

Those who received criticism from the black doctor responded faster to black related words and those who received praise to doctor related words

30
Q

Allen and Wilder (1979)

A

Minimal groups filled out attitude questionnaire and asked to predict how either an in-group or out-group member would respond – assumed in group beliefs were similar

31
Q

Macrae et al (1994)

A

Participants simultaneously listen to a lecture and make judgements on a hypothetical person from a list of traits with or without the stereotype

Those with stereotype eased burden on judgement task so recalled more traits and did better on MCQ of lecture

32
Q

Darley & P.H Gross (1983)

A

Showed video of girl answering questions ambiguously who they believed to be upper or working class and estimated she would do better or worse academically based on this

33
Q

Quattrone & Jones (1980)

A

Uni students shown video of other students answering questions

Judged them more similar if they thought they came from a different uni

34
Q

Hamilton & Gifford (1976)

A

Shown slides of equally distributed positive and negative behaviours of fictional people belonging to group A (2/3rds =majority) or group B – they overestimated negative behaviour in group B and underestimated in group A

35
Q

Duncan (1976)

A

Shown a vid of two men (1 white & 1 black) talking and 1 pushes the other – if black pushed – interpreted as aggressive, if white pushed – playing around

36
Q

Maass et al (1989)

A

Showed people sketches of members of their team and the other engaged in an action (some desirable and some not) – they described negative actions of own team less abstractly and opposite for positive – the reverse was seen for the other team

37
Q

Devine (1989b)

A

High and low prejudiced people selected and presented them with words too briefly to be consciously recognised (some related to black stereotype)

Then gave them an ambiguous passage about an man acting in an ambiguously hostile manner – he was seen as more hostile/negative in black condition equally for high or low prejudicial people.

Then asked to list characteristics of black Americans and a clear difference in negative traits emerged.

38
Q

Payne (2001)

A

White participants shown a tool/weapon after a black or white face and asked to quickly identify whether it was a tool or weapon – faster to say weapon after black face

39
Q

Shook and Facio (2008)

A

University assigning cross racial roommates improved implicit measures of attitudes towards racial group.

40
Q

Pettigrew and Tropp (2006, 2008)

A

Meta analysis of 500+ studies found significant negative correlation between contact and prejudice irrespective of Alpert’s conditions but stronger effects were found when present

41
Q

Why are explicit measures not always reliable?

A

Social desirability, or impression management concerns

Prejudice can be ambiguous

Prejudice and stereotypes can be hidden

42
Q

Evaluative priming

A

Measures response times to words and error rate

Priming - activating one stimulus (prime) facilitates (or inhibits) the processing of another stimulus (target)

Lexical decision task - classification of a target stimuli (words) - quicker responses indicate increased accessibility

Priming effect - quicker responses to target after an associated prime

43
Q

Response latency

A

A measure of implicit association

44
Q

Subliminal priming

A

Prime below the threshold of conscious awareness

45
Q

Dovidio et al (2002)

A

White participants were measured for implicit and explicit attitudes towards blacks.

They then interacted with a White and a Black student

Verbal and non-verbal friendliness during interactions coded

Audiotapesvs.silentvideotapes