Lectures Flashcards
intergroup relations
any aspect of human interaction that involves individuals perceiving themselves as members of a SOCIAL CATEGORY
or being perceived BY OTHERS as belonging to a social category
affect is connected to…
prejudice
cognition is connected to…
stereotype
behaviour is connected to…
discrimination
prejudice
affect
attitude (favour/disfavour) toward a group
broadly “good” or “bad”
stereotype
cognition
belief about a group of people
(can be accompanied by affect/emotional valence)
discrimination
behaviour
behaviours direct toward people on the basis of their group membership
2 dimensions of prejudice
- can be OVERT or HIDDEN
- can be POSITIVE or NEGATIVE
generalization is part of…
stereotypes
means extending beyond known group members
3 key aspects of stereotypes
- shared, cultural belief
- accuracy *
- inputs are often biased
- always overgeneralized - descriptive and prescriptive
- ‘they do this’, and ‘they should do this’
4 types of discrimination
- interpersonal
- organizational
- institutional
- cultural
examples of aspects of identity that may be subject to prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination
nationality
social class
racial/ethnic identity
gender
sexual orientation
religion
appearance
weight
disabilities
diseases
organizations you belong to
consumer preferences
social clique
4 levels at which intergroup relations operate
- systems and institutions
- groups and organizations
- interpersonal interactions
- individual minds
2 levels which psyc talks about the most
interpersonal interactions
individual minds
the 4 levels are “mutually constitutive”
not mutually exclusive
ie. legalization of gay marriage began with individual minds and then was reflected in systems of law
inequality within systems and institutions
laws that give diff opportunities/privileges to diff groups
at the institutional level
example of inequality within systems and institutions
DOMA
defence of marriage act: a US federal law passed by congress
defined marriage for federal purposes as the union of one MAN and one WOMAN
allowed states to REFUSE to recognize SAME-SEX marriages granted under the laws of other states
institutional discrimination
when norms, policies and practices associated with an institution result in different outcomes on the basis of a group distinction
example of institutional discrimination
different prison sentences for crack cocaine possession or powder cocaine
only 5 grams of crack cocaine = 5 years in prison
but 500 grams of powder cocaine is needed for equivalent sentence
and 82% of crack cocaine offenders are Black, while only 18% are White/Hispanic
organizational discrimination
when norms, policies and practices associated with an organization results in different outcomes on the basis of a group distinction
ie. banning dreadlocks at an elementary school
interpersonal discrimination
when one person treats another person differently on the basis of their group membership
ie. white versus black man attempting to steal a bicycle
4 components of individual minds
- personalities
- perceptions
- beliefs
- identity
cultural practices that reinforce inequality
inequality and discrimination can be embedded into regular cultural practices
bedspreads of princesses for little girls, and astronauts for little boys
t-shirt with “smart like daddy, sweet like mommy” written on it
lightening skin colour of people on magazine covers
making Cleopatra more conventionally attractive
cultural capital
social assets of a person that promote SOCIAL MOBILITY
ie. computer algorithm that looked for traits like being named Jared or having played high school lacrosse
social capital
value obtained from interpersonal relationships and social networks
nepotism
ranking of school correlates with ranking of job placements
selective exposure
prejudice and stereotype relationship
tendency to selectively seek info that reinforces one’s attitudes, while selectively avoiding info that contradicts one’s attitudes
ie. what news sources you tune in to
prejudices and stereotypes work together to…
justify discrimination
pictures of tough looking men with face tattoos and dark skin leads to increased support for more restrictive immigration policies
how can discrimination cause prejudice/stereotyping?
self-prejudice/stereotyping, in a way
self-fulfilling prophecy
self-fulfilling prophecy
- people have expectation about what a person/group is like
- this influences how they act toward the person/group
- this causes the person/group to behave consistently with the expectation
- this makes the expectation come true
- this provides “proof” that the og expectation was correct
self-fulfilling prophecy in action
phone call study
men and women had casual phone convo
men = randomly assigned to retrieve an attractive or unattractive photo of the woman beforehand
coders independently rated the woman’s recording (without seeing their appearance)
women who were thought to be attractive were perceived to be…
- more sociable, warm, funny, independent, outgoing, interesting
summary of lecture 1
3 processes that are the largest focus of intergroup relations research:
1. prejudice
2. stereotyping
3. discrimination
these processes can operate at level of:
1. individual minds
2. interpersonal interactions
3. group/organization
4. institution
these levels are “mutually constitutive” in that they influence each other, but psych mostly focuses on the first two
prof’s “briefest history of social psychology”
1875: William James starts first psyc lab ever
1945: Kurt Lewin becomes Director of ‘Center for Group Dynamics at MIT
William James’ lab details
first psyc lab ever
located at Harvard
studies sensation, perception, emotion
William James’ important book
The Principles of Psychology
published in 1890
why is Kurt Lewin important?
recognized as first social psychologist to use experimental approach to study:
- group dynamics on impact of one’s social environment
- group dynamics on impact of one’s individual behaviour
example of scientific racism
phrenology
scientific racism basic idea
people observed that some groups were on average more successful
attributed this to intrinsic differences between races
entire emphasis on internal racial characteristics
phrenology
popular scientific fad in early 19th century
believed that skull shape = reliable predictor of psychological traits
ie. two heads with diff shape, one labelled ‘a genuine husband’ and the other labelled ‘an unreliable husband’
scientific racism: McDougall (1921)
McDougall wrote one of the first textbooks on social psychology
lectured on his purported identification of a number of psychological qualities associated with “superior” groups
argued “Nordic” races were more likely to possess: curiosity, introversion, self-assertion
argued Black people were inherently submissive - which made it appropriate for them to subjected to lower status in society
publishing year of McDougall’s textbook on social psychology
1908
McDougall’s job title
prof at Duke University
department chair at Harvard
specific traits McDougall attributed to “Nordic” and Black people
curiosity, introversion, self-assertion
said Black people were “inherently submissive”
scientific racism: Johnson-Reed Act (1924)
- imposed cap of 165 000 immigrants from countries outside of the Western Hemisphere (~80% reduction)
- barred all immigrants from Asia
disproportionately favoured immigrants from Northern and Western Europe
justification for the Johnson-Reed Act drew from…
research on eugenics and other forms of scientific racism
social darwinism
Herbert Spencer: creator of the term “survival of the fittest”
existing disparities were then justified as reflecting INNATE DIFFERENCES between more and less worthy groups
ways in which social darwinism doesn’t make sense
- wrong from an evolutionary perspective - evolution selects at the INDIVIDUAL LEVEL, not the group level
- it’s a naturalistic fallacy
naturalistic fallacy
when people believe that simply because something is the way it is means that it should be the way it is
social darwinism informing laws
German sterilization law passed between WWI and WWII
NYT article
forcibly sterilized people with mental handicaps
reasoning came from prevailing social science of the times
justification: “should be working to create more productive and intelligent society in the future”
Virginia Sterilization Law of 1924
people with mental disabilities were forcibly sterilized
reasoning: “we owe it to society to ensure that future generations don’t carry on ‘innate defects’”
reviewed and widely upheld by the Supreme Court at the time
these were not fringe ideas
(some) changing tides: scientific racism and darwinism
many researchers were beginning to realize that any supposed biological differences between groups couldn’t be solely responsible for intergroup disparities seen across society
STRUCTURAL forces and PREJUDICE must also be contributors
influential figure in these changing tides
Floyd Allport
1924, he said: ‘The discrepancy in mental ability is not great enough to account for the problem which centres around the American Negro or to explain fully the ostracism to which he is subjected.’
William Graham Sumner
some consider him the founding father of social psychology
prof at Yale 1872-1909
first professor of sociology in NA
what did William Graham Sumner publish in 1906?
Folkways: a sociological study of how moral systems develop across different cultures
- spent time in diff cultures, tried to come up with general laws that groups followed in order to get along with one another
how did Folkways most influence the study of intergroup relations?
in Folkways, Sumner most influenced study of intergroup relations by coining the terms:
- ingroup
- outgroup
- ehtnocentrism
William Graham Sumners on ‘ingroups’ and ‘ougroups’
a differentiation arises between ourselves, the we-group or in-group, and everybody else, the others-groups or out-groups. the insiders in a we-group are in a relation of peace, order, law, government and industry to each other. their relation to all outsiders is one of war and plunder.
William Graham Sumners ‘on the fundamental need to be a part of a group’
if one is trying to carry on the struggle for existence with nature, the fact that others are doing the same in the same environment is an essential condition for him…we cannot describe mankind at all without categories.
your self identity is tied up with your group identity
Walter Lippman (1889-1974)
journalist, won 2 Pulitzer prizes
founding member of The New Republic newspaper
what did Walter Lippmann publish?
Public Opinion - a book
book with rather negative assessment of individuals’ ability to act rationally and self-govern
specifically looked at how people live and interact in big cities
what important term did Lippmann coin in Public Opinion?
stereotype
he adapted the term from the printing industry to describe the process through which someone hakes impressions towards one group member and applies them to all group members
in Public Opinion, what is suggested as the reason behind the creation of stereotypes?
modern world is too chaotic and disorderly, so people must (over) simplify it:
“we aren’t equipped to deal with so much subtlety, so much variety, so many permutations and combinations. and although we have to act in that environment, we have to reconstruct it on a simpler model before we can manage with it.”
Public Opinion: stereotypes arise from need to abstract
“inevitably our opinions cover a bigger space, a longer reach of time, a greater number of things, than we can directly observe. They therefore have to be pieced together out of what others have reported and what we can imagine.”
Public Opinion: cultural influences and expectations shape the way we view the social world
“for the most part we don’t first see and then define: we DEFINE FIRST AND THEN SEE. In the great blooming, buzzing confusion of the outer world, we pick out what our culture has already defined for us, and we tend to perceive that which we have picked out in the form stereotyped by our culture.”
we accumulate suggestions about how groups act through other people/media
results in over-exaggeration, misperception, skewed experience
confirmation bias
first empirical study on stereotypes
Princeton trilogy studies (1933)
asked people to list the stereotypes they hold about different people
purely descriptive
then made a checklist with lots of groups and some stereotypical traits
asked people t say YES or NO if they agreed the trait applied to the group
every 10-15 years someone replicates this study to see if the results change
Katz & Braly: Motivated Perception of Stereotypes
yet we find 78% of 100 students agreeing that one of the most typical characteristics of Germans is their SCIENTIFIC-MINDEDNESS
of course individual experience may enter into the student’s judgment but probably ONLY TO CONFIRM THE ORIGINAL STEREOTYPE which has been learned
ie. people have heard of Germany’s scientific progress and devotion to applied science. so when meeting a German will expect the scientific trait to appear, and things that confirm this view will stick out
confirmation bias
LaPiere (1934): Attitudes vs Actions was the first social science study on…
discrimination
LaPiere was annoyed about…
the state of scientific research at the time
it relied on SELF-REPORT scales or HYPOTHETICAL behaviours
LaPiere wanted to prove that people often say one thing and do another
LaPiere study setup
1934 - Attitudes vs Actions
for 2 years, LaPiere traveled around America with a Chinese immigrant couple
in total, the three of them visited 66 hotels and 184 restaurants
only refused service once
6 months after these visits, LaPiere contacted each establishment and asked whether they’d provide service to a Chinese couple
secured responses from 128 hotels or restaurants
what percentage of establishments said they would refuse service to a Chinese couple?
92%
possible reasons for the discrepancy:
- the couple was accompanied by the Stanford prof (old white guy)
- maybe diff person was providing the answer than who had served them
who was Gordon Allport?
Harvard prof from 1930 to 1967
published The Nature of Prejudice in 1956
The Nature of Prejudice
1956, published by Gordon Allport
arguably the first psychological analysis of issues related to prejudice and discrimination
laid foundations for many influential research topics in intergroup relations
what is The Nature of Prejudice most credited for?
- taking a “social cognitive” perspective of prejudice
- arguing for the importance of studying intergroup contact
Nature of Prejudice on why human beings slip so easily into ethnic prejudice
“because the two essential ingredients that we have discussed - erroneous generalization and hostility - are natural and common capacities of the human mind”
“once formed, categories are the basis of normal prejudgment. we cannot possible avoid this process. orderly living depends on it.”
how does The Nature of Prejudice depart from scientific racism?
recognize human tendency for erroneous generalization and hostility
very different from attributing differences to innate traits in different races
suggests instead that “natural ways” in which the mind works leads to BIASED perceptions of the world around us
Allport’s “Contact Hypothesis”
intergroup contact = effective means of reducing intergroup hostility and prejudice
Allport’s intergroup contact can take many forms, depending on factors like:
- quantity (frequency, duration)
- status (equal status groups? status differences?)
- goals (is the contact facilitating cooperative OR competitive behaviour?)
- social (is the contact formal or casual, voluntary or involuntary?)
- physical (is contact happening in employment, religious, residential context?)
3 characteristics of effective contact, for Allport
- based on ‘acquaintanceship’
- integrated
- communal
effective contact: “based on acquaintanceship’
knowledge about and acquaintanceship with members of minority groups make for tolerant and friendly attitudes….contacts that bring knowledge and acquaintance are likely to engender sounder beliefs concerning minority groups, and for this reason contribute to reduction of prejudice
effective contact: “integrated”
zonal residential contact makes for increased tension, whereas integrated housing policies, through encouraging knowledge and acquaintanceship, removes barriers to effective communication
effective contact: “communal”
contact must reach below the surface in order to be effective in altering prejudice. only the type of contact that leads people to DO THINGS TOGETHER is likely to result in changed attitudes
3 first studies on intergroup contact
- Singer (1948)
- Stouffer (1949)
- Deutsch & Collins (1951)
Singer: intergroup contact study
1948
sample of White military officers and enlisted men
77% reported their attitudes had become more favourable towards Black people after having SERVED IN THE SAME UNIT
0% said their attitudes became less favourable
here, status was manipulated and goals were aligned
Stouffer: intergroup contact study
1949
compared attitudes of men who did versus didn’t fight alongside Black soldiers in WWII
only White soldiers who fought alongside Black soldiers showed more favourable attitudes towards Black people
close proximity was required
Deutsch & Collins: intergroup contact study
1951
compared residents assigned to live in more versus less integrated public housing
residents in more integrated housing developed more positive attitudes towards Black people
what social policy did the Deutsch & Collins study lead to?
led many states t reverse policies about segregated housing
Muzafer Sherif
Turkish social psycholgist and former student of Gordon Allport
Left position in Turkey in 1944 due to political persecution - never able to return
eventually settled at Uni of Oklahoma
what experiment did Muzafer Sherif conduct?
Robbers Cave Experiment
what did Muzafer Sherif’s work give rise to?
Realistic Conflict Theory
Realistic Conflict Theory
argues that intergroup conflict is a reflection of social structural forces
specifically, conflict arises due to competition for desired resources
Robers Cave Experiment overview
3 week experiment at summer camp
22 eleven year olds who had no prior contact
randomly assigned to one of two teams, kept separate from other team at first
series of activities increased identification with one’s team
then competition stage: teams competed for prizes and bragging rights
finally, engaged in mutually cooperative events - to show how intergroup conflict could be reduced
Robbers Cave Experiment: thesis
“intergroup attitudes and behaviours are determined PRIMARILY by the nature of functional relations between groups in question…not by the deviate or neurotic behaviour of particular individual members”
Robbers Cave Experiment: three stages
Stage 1: experimental ingroup formation
Stage 2: friction between groups
Stage 3: integration between groups
Stage 1: forming ingroups
boys were placed in one of two groups (with no knowledge of other group’s existence)
then were presented with series of hard but solvable challenges - to increase identification with one’s group
activities = selected to not promote competition within one’s group (like sports)
examples of activities used during stage 1
going on a hike
building a tent
carrying canoes to river
when were the groups informed about the existence of the other groups?
once the groups had:
- formed a strong bond
- developed norms
group’s reaction to hearing about the other group and that they’d challenged them at baseball
“they can’t. we’ll challenge them first! they’ve got some nerve.”
stage 2: competition
boys now know about existence of other group
engaged in series of direct competitions, where there would be a CLEAR winner (baseball, tug of war, treasure hunt etc)
successful, as they soon began antagonizing each other
example of behaviour between groups during stage 2 (flag)
“an Eagles member noticed the Rattlers’ flag on the baseball field. He yelled they could take it down…tried to tear it up…found matches and set the flag on fire…decided to hang the scorched remnant back up”
Robber’s Cave: aside from studying intergroup conflict, was also one of the first studies to show how intergroup dynamics can influence…
processes like PERCEPTION
Eagles beat Rattlers in a 48 minute long tug-of-war
later the boys were asked how long the match had lasted
most Eagles felt like the time had flown by
the Rattlers felt the event lasted “a helluva long time”
- Eagles gave their time estimates in minutes
- Rattlers gave their time estimates in hours
(even though the same question was asked of both groups AND all boys were questioned individually)
stage 3: integration
boys were then lead to series of situations that would allow for POSITIVE CONTACT and COOPERATION between groups
specific trait of the activities used to integrate the groups
superordinate goals (shared by both groups)
examples of the activities used to integrate the groups
- truck was stuck and needed to be pulled free
- water tank for camp was broken and they had to work together to “fix” it
very effective:
“when the water came through, the boys rejoiced in common. the Rattlers didn’t object to having the Eagles get ahead of them when they all got a drink, since the Eagles didn’t have their canteens with them and were thirstier. no protests or “ladies first”-type remarks were made”
2 other lessons from Robbers Cave
- nature of intergroup relations - for good or evil - doesn’t stem from existence of tools and techniques: the same tools and techniques can serve harmony/integration as well as competition/conflict
- theories of intergroup relations that posit single factors (leadership, national character, individual frustrations) as sovereign determinants of intergroup conflict/harmony have only explained selective cases (there has to be something more structural at work - isn’t simply traits)
Henri Tajfel
Polish social psychologist who was a POW during WWII while serving in French army
Henri Tajfel: 3 important points
- founder of Social Identity Theory
- helped advance notion that stereotypes and prejudice rely on “normal” cognitive processes (like Lippman)
- advanced research on Minimal Groups Paradigm
Social Identity Theory
argued that individuals’ sense of identity and self-esteem = primarily determined by group memberships
minimal groups paradigm
take abstract processes and study them in lab context
now we can take people and randomly assign them to groups - don’t need to track down real life, pre-existing groups
can isolate characteristics - less confounding factors
background: mere classification into ingroups and outgroups = enough to create intergroup bias
minimal ingroup effect discovery
bit of a fluke
Tajfel = initially trying to find a “baseline condition” where group effects weren’t important (where ingroups and outgroups wouldn’t form)
to do so, divided school class arbitrarily into “over-estimators” and “under-estimators” for a dot-counting task
despite his intentions, even these arbitrary group levels = sufficient to create intergroup bias between under-estimators and over-estimators
book written by Henri Tajfel
Human Groups and Social Categories
2 insights from Human Groups and Social Categories
- intergroup processes can be studied in a controlled, lab setting
“a systematic study of social behaviour is an essential task…there is no evidence that other approaches present as much solidity as the experimental straw appears to have”
- on the interplay between group membership and individual identity
“an intensified affiliation with a group is only possible when the group is capable of supplying some satisfactory aspect of an individual’s social identity”
Frantz Fanon
psychiatrist and philosopher from Martinique
what did Fanon often write about?
how societal structures force marginalized groups to INTERNALIZE a sense of inferiority
“[The Black man] lives in a society that makes his inferiority complex possible, in a society that draws its strength by maintaining this complex, in a society that proclaims the superiority of one race over another”
which two psychologists further developed Fanon’s thinking? and what did they develop it into?
John Jost and Mahzarin Banaji
Systems Justification Theory
Systems Justification Theory
maintaining existing social structures is prioritized by people
even at the expense of personal or group interests
ie. Black people supporting Trump
study behind Brown vs Board of Education
1940’s - psychologists Mamie and Kenneth Clark
conducted series of ‘doll tests’ - asked Black children to choose between a White or Black doll
most children preferred the White doll
Brown vs Board of Education
Supreme Court trial that cited doll study - against segregated schools
majority opinion was broader conclusion that cultural messages create inferiority
“to separate African American children from others of similar age/qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status…affects their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone. we conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine “separate but equal” has no place. separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.”
social cognition
study of how mental processes like PERCEPTION, MEMORY and THOUGHT shape our understanding of the world
what does social cognition argue we need to do to improve understanding of how the human mind functions?
argues that in order to better understand processes related to bias, discrimination and prejudice, we must improve our understanding of how the human mind functions (ie. how it categorizes stimuli, how it groups objects)
implicit social cognition
investigates role of automatic (and often unconscious) processes in social psychological processes
example of implicit social cognition
evaluative priming
black or white face paired with negative or positive word
if black face is flashed quickly before negative word, will speed up verification
if flashed before positive word, verification is slower
experimental control
degree to which a researcher can determine the environment in which a research question is explored
generally, a “lab study” has high experimental control
surveys have low experimental control - can be taken in all sorts of diff contexts
psychological realism
degree to which a study simulates phenomena as experienced in everyday life
more immersive studies have higher psychological realism
internal validity
degree to which a study can rule out ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESES
if a study has many alternative hypotheses that could explain the results (other than that proposed by the researcher), the study has low internal validity
external validity
degree to which the results of a study generalize to other contexts, samples and time periods
self-report measures
assessing attitudes, thoughts or beliefs
by presenting a question, several possible responses
and having participants select the response they believe to be most representative of their own attitudes, thoughts or beliefs
are there many self report scales that test ‘explicit’ racial attitudes? are they similar or differentiated?
there are tons
and they overlap a bunch - lots of redundancies
results from self reports about ‘explicit’ racial attitudes versus from priming for ‘implicit’ racial attitudes
explicit:
- 70% say they have no preference for Black or White people
- 20% say they prefer White people to some degree
- 10% say they prefer Black people to some degree
implicit:
- 15% of people have little/no negative associations with Black people
- 30% have some negative associations
- 55% have strong negative associations
self report doesn’t tell the whole story
indirect measures
inferring attitudes, thoughts or beliefs from some type of behaviour rather than from self-report
example of an indirect measure
evaluative priming (EP) procedure
(physiological measures) measuring heart rate while interacting with a White or Black person
evaluative priming
uses the reaction times of identifying positive versus negative words to infer ‘implicit’ racial attitudes
if certain stimuli facilitate the identification of negative words, then those stimuli are believed to hold a negative association
if certain stimuli facilitate the identification of positive words, those stimuli are believed to hold a positive association
weaknesses of self report measures
people are untruthful
response bias/social desirability
attitudes can be unconscious
ideas we have regarding our attitudes don’t always translate to our behaviours
weaknesses of indirect measures
consequential validity - why do we care about these results?
these associations may not really carry out to real world consequences
hard for them to explain systematic issues or biases - really are just pressing buttons on a keyboard
weaknesses of physiological measures
ie. heart rate
many factors affect heart rate
jury is still out on what exactly an elevated heart rate means
measuring behaviour: budget cut example
participants told to imagine that the student government had to make some severe budget cuts for the next year, and that the student government wanted wanted other students’ opinions on how to make budget cuts
participants would then be shown a list of several organizations and asked to propose some budget cuts (club sports, music groups etc)
one student organization would be specifically about Black people (ie. Black Students Association)
degree to which students cut funding to the Black Students Association could be used as a measure of how much they disliked Black people
weaknesses of hypothetical behavioural measures
(ones like the budget cut experiment)
no direct link
it’s a hypothetical task - people may not be taking it seriously
maybe cutting funds is due to a third variable (ie. you’re a band geek and don’t want funding to go anywhere else)
Frank Kachanoff: creation of a high-investment environment
Kachanoff uses a multi-hour long study where participants join a group, complete computer missions together, develop entire culture by selecting a flag and identifying group snacks
then, Kachanoff uses these ‘maximal group paradigms’ to look at questions related to how experiencing lower/higher status impacts group identity/behaviour
Kachanoff’s creation of high investment environment is a way of maximizing…
experimental control
weaknesses of intensive behavioural measures
still only a psychological study
may not reflect real world behaviours
disconnect between predicted and actual behaviour - setup
one condition: non-Black participants = asked to imagine seeing a White person use a racial slur towards a Black person
were then asked who they would choose to work with in a follow-up task
disconnect between predicted and actual behaviour - hypothetical condition results
20% of participants said they would choose the White person to work with in a follow-up task
disconnect between predicted and actual behaviour - witness condition
in another condition, non-Black participants actually SAW the interaction take place between a Black and White person (both were pretending to be participants)
now when choosing a partner for upcoming task, over 60% chose the White person
disconnect between predicted and actual behaviour - hypothetical versus actual percentages
20% in hypothetical
60% in actual
first-person shooter task is an example of a study that tries to capture…
more impactful behaviour that are also hard for participants to regulate in the moment
shows pictures of White or Black men, very quickly
all of them are holding various objects
task is to shoot if the object they’re holding is a gun
results of first-person shooter task
error rates for shooting an UNARMED person
- higher for photos of Black people
- lower for photos of White people
error rates for NOT shooting an ARMED person
- higher for photos of White people
- lower for photos of Black people
term we use to classify what kind of measure the first person shooter task is
real behavioural measure
weaknesses of real behavioural measures
although more rich and nuanced (realistic) than the ELP, still in the world of the hypothetical
how generalizable is it?
also, first person shooter task only includes men
measuring ‘realer’ behaviour study example
waiting room study
waiting room study setup
participants entered the psychology building and found a note asking them to take a seat in a waiting area
other participants (actually confederates) were strategically placed around the room
at one end of a string of empty seats was a Black confederate, at the other end was a White confederate
researchers analyzed where the participant chose to sit
waiting room study results
on average, the White participants sat closer to the White than the Black confederate
weaknesses of subtler behavioural measures
when thinking about waiting room study…
similarity/familiarity effect?
maybe there are systematic differences (say, in the approachability) of the confederates
psychology building and students - may be too obvious/they may catch on
what if they go two seats from the White person and three from the Black person? how do we draw meaning from that difference?
archival analyses: measuring real-world behaviour
uses existing datasets to understand how social forces might influence real-world behaviour
example of archival analyses
Voigt et al 2017
coded how police officers spoke to Black versus White drivers following a traffic stop
found that officers = much more polite and reassuring to White drivers, more disrespectful to Black drivers
archival analysis: cocaine example
2011 minimum amount of cocaine needed for a felony offense changed from 50g to 280g
Tuttle investigated how this change in policy impact racial discrimination in police reports and court sentencing
post-2011 - the amounts of cocaine people were reported to carry were much more likely to be exactly/right around 280 grams
police rounded up the amounts to the minimum 280 grams - so that they could sentence more people
archival analysis: traffic stop example
Pierson et al analyzed over 100 million traffic stops and found that the percentage of stops that were of Black drivers decreased after dusk
after dusk, it is harder to identify the race of the driver
suggests that officers are using race in deciding whether or not to stop a person
weaknesses of archival research
strongly constrained to who has access to these records - lots of things we want to study but that isn’t publicly available
but also, the data may not give the whole story
hard to explain WHY it’s really happening
- studying something that isn’t randomly assigned
- maybe different groups of cops patrol Black versus White areas
- if it’s something at an individual level (prejudiced cops) then you would want to train each officer on anti-prejudice topics, whereas if it’s a broader organization issue, would want to change the structure on a higher level
audit studies: measuring real-world behaviour
audit studies: attempt to combine the experimental control AND internal validity of a lab study while also measuring real-world behaviour
ie. find a real world behaviour, give people versions of it
- change only the relevant social dimension of interest
ie. randomly assign Black and White people to interact with the same cop (to isolate for race)
- or a woman versus man (to isolate for gender)
audit studies typically involve finding situations that involve…
judgment or behaviour that may be influenced by social information (such as race, gender, ethnicity)
fake ads or resumes may be created, trained actors may be hired, in an attempt to keep everything constant between conditions EXCEPT for social information
governments have been known to run audit studies to explore…
whether anti-discrimination laws are being respected (ie. for equal access to housing)
Butler and Brockman: audit study example
tested whether elected officials discriminate against their constituents based on race
state legislators in the US were randomly assigned to receive the same email
but the email was either from ‘Jake Mueller’ or DeShawn Jackson’
though not a large effect, the same mail was more likely to receive a response if from ‘Jake Mueller’ (61%) than from ‘Deshawn Jackson’ (55%)
Butler and Brockman audit study: results were only true when the email didn’t signal what?
only true when the email didn’t signal a political party affiliation
Kang et al: audit study example setup
investigated phenomena of ‘Whitening’ resumes, where minority applicants remove racial cues from resumes to avoid anticipated discrimination
they found real jobs and randomly sent each one a resume that was either low vs high in “Whitening” cues
Kang et al: audit study example results
despite having the same qualifications, the “UnWhitened” applicant only received a callback to 10% of jobs, compared to 25% of jobs for the “Whitened” applicant
“UnWhitened” resume versus “Whitened” resume
“UnWhitened”:
- Name: Lamar Smith
- Activities: Peer Counsellor, Black Students Association
“Whitened”:
- Name: L. James Smith
- Activities: Peer Counsellor, Students Association
Dietrich and Sands: audit study example setup
used traffic cameras in NYC to look at interpersonal forms of “racial avoidance”
confederates (either two White or two Black men) stood in the same spot on sidewalk and were trained to have a similar conversation for 15 minutes
Dietrich and Sands: audit study example results
on average, pedestrians showed a greater deviation in their walking paths towards the Black versus White confederates
this difference translated into roughly four more inches of space given to Black Confederates
Dietrich and Sands: audit study preliminary results indicate that the effect was stronger…
among women than men
weaknesses of audit studies
can’t control for every factor because it’s naturalistic observation
extremely expensive and resource intensive
would be hard to trial how best to reduce these things - because it’s so expensive
- to do the amount of trials needed to find solutions, would cost too much
is there a single “unified” theory of prejudice and discrimination?
no
partly because prejudice and discrimination has many different causes and explanations (individual, interpersonal, structural etc)
6 classes of theories of prejudice and discrimination
- scientific racism
- psychodynamic theories
- sociocultural theories
- cognitive theories
- evolutionary theories
- ‘intergroup relations theories’
scientific racism
postulates that ‘inherently inferior’ groups exist
attaches differences between racial groups to scientific ‘evidence’
commits naturalistic fallacy
scientific racism dominant time period
before the 1920’s
scientific racism context
use of scientific research to justify White cultural domination
scientific racism focus
identifying exotic and negative differences in non-White people
scientific racism view of prejudice
justified by “data”
when did phrenology grow in popularity?
in the US during the 1830s and 1840s
at a time when many Americans were looking for scientific justification to continue practicing slavery
phrenology
part of scientific racism
belief that brain has multiple “organs” that correspond to different abilities/traits
name of American doctor who popularized idea that race = correlated with skull size
Samuel Morton
thought that skull size (which he believed correlated with race) reflected group differences in intelligence
modern manifestations of phrenology
AI facial reading start-ups
- “job interviews…conducted by facial reading technology…to identify the best candidates”
^ but these algorithms are being trained to look for certain traits ie. whiteness
- “gaydar”
diagnosing people’s sexuality based on their facial features
worry here is that we’re picking up on on some other difference between groups
ie. if it’s being trained by dating profiles, then maybe it’s picking up on a certain hairstyle that is popular in gay men - only correlated with sexuality, not the root of sexuality
psychodynamic theories dominant time period
1920s-1950s
psychodynamic theories context
prevalence of explicit racism
aftermath of Holocaust
how can we explain things like the Holocaust?
psychodynamic theories focus
identifying WHY individuals are prejudiced
bad apples explanation: certain people have mal-adjusted personalities that cause them to err in their thinking
these errors = prejudice
psychodynamic theories view of prejudice
prejudice is irrational and unjustifiable
prejudice is rooted in individual differences
- personality
- unconscious defence mechanisms
- projection of frustration onto minorities
psychodynamic theories: displace frustration and aggression
- people get frustrated when their goal is blocked
- following frustration, people feel aggression, which creates an intention to harm
- however, aggression is usually displaced - because the source of the frustration is too powerful
- as a result, aggression i displaced onto a weaker target (even the self)
- the weaker the target, the more satisfying the release of aggression
the authoritarian personality
Adorno’s research is tied to the psychodynamic approach
set of personality traits associated with belief in obedience to authority and oppression of subordinate groups
psychodynamic explanation: the “id” produces negative impulses, which can’t be properly controlled by one’s “ego”
this psychic conflict then projects those negative impulses onto minority groups and creates greater respect for authority
the authoritarian personality approach thinks of prejudice as a…
personality trait
so some are more likely to be prejudiced than others
the authoritarian personality: sample items
‘young people sometimes get rebellious ideas, but as they grow up they ought to get over them and settle down’
‘an insult to our country’s honour should always be punished’
‘most people don’t realize how much our lives are controlled by plots hatched in secret places’
‘nobody ever learned anything really important except through suffering’
‘most of our social problems would be solved if we could somehow get rid of the immoral, crooked, and feeble-minded people’
psychodynamic theories: state of research today
similar personality traits, but no “psychodynamic” explanations
- personality psych today has ditched the ‘id’ versus ‘ego’ dynamic
- but people still think about individual differences across people that are associated with prejudice
- ie. extent to which you think your values/current society is threatened (may affect your opinion on things like immigration laws)
new: authoritarians have increased sensitivity to societal threats
- ie. authoritarians are more likely to support Trump
