Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psyc 331 > Post Midterm I: March 18-March 27 > Flashcards

Post Midterm I: March 18-March 27 Flashcards

1
Q

emotional & motivational responses to discrimination lead to…

A

behavioural responses

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

behavioural responses to discrimination

A
  1. concealment
  2. compensation
  3. confrontation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

concealment and stigma

A

hiding or obscuring your stigma

can be PARTIAL or COMPLETE

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

example of concealing stigma

A

pictures of Ellen’s wife and then actor from Orange is the New Black

both are lesbians

but Ellen’s wife is straight-coded (stigma is concealed) whereas the other woman is much more gay-coded

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

benefit of concealment

A

you’re not judged negatively according to your stigma

ie. Sorry to Bother You movie

protagonist is a Black telemarketer

but he has a White sounding voice

so he escapes his stigma at work

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

2 cognitive costs of concealing stigma

A
  1. preoccupation
  2. increased vigilance
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

cognitive cost of concealing: eating disorder study SETUP

A

people with an ED role-played not having an ED

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

cognitive cost of concealing: eating disorder study RESULTS

A
  1. increased ACCESSIBILITY of eating disorder (measured through a word-completion task: ie. _OOD and _INGE)
  2. higher secrecy, suppression, intrusive thoughts about ED
  3. projection of ED thoughts onto interviewer
  4. ED participants who were assigned to not reveal their condition to a confederate later performed worse on a cognitive test
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

emotional costs of concealing a stigma

A
  1. anxiety (about being caught)
  2. shame (internalizing your stigma)
  3. ambivalence about identity (if I’m downplaying this part of myself, it must not be that important to my self-concept)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what percentage of participants who had a concealable stigma (LGBT, history of mental illness) agreed it was best to conceal this stigma when meeting a new person?

A

67%

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

study: conceal or not conceal stigma (university major) SETUP

A

participants = randomly assigned to conceal or not conceal their stigma

modified here to be a stigmatized major (ie. Desautels, eng)

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

study: conceal or not conceal stigma (university major) RESULTS

A

participants told to HIDE their identity reported:

a) LOWER LEVELS OF BELONGING

b) LESS POSITIVE INTERACTIONS with convo partner

these effects = mediated by LOWER FEELINGS OF AUTHENTICITY in hiding condition

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

behavioural implications of concealing

A
  1. avoiding social interactions
  2. impression management to conceal stigma
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

3 points: impression management to conceal stigma

A

a) counter-stereotypical behaviour

b) modifying mannerisms

c) lying/keeping quiet about certain topics

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

4 things that shape the decision to conceal or disclose

A
  1. threat of discovery (likely to be discovered?)
  2. self-verification motives (motivations to want others to see us as we see ourselves)
  3. context (work, family, friends?)
  4. degree of disclosure (full, partial?)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

concealment is a ____ ___!

A

mixed bag

concealing can prevent discrimination

but can have cognitive, emotional and behavioural drawbacks

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

compensation and stigma

A

behaviours that reduce interpersonal discrimination towards oneself

(when stigma is visible or disclosed)

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

example strategies of compensation for a stigma

A
  1. acknowledgement
  2. increased positivity
  3. individuating information
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

acknowledgement

A

compensatory strategy for stigma

openly addressing one’s stigma

eases interactions because underlying tension is addressed

reduces ambiguity (recall: ambiguity makes people uncomfortable)

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

increased positivity

A

compensatory strategy for stigma

acting in a way to engender more positive attitudes

ie. acting likeable, friendly, approachable

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

what stigmatized group is likely to use increased positivity as a strategy?

A

people with disabilities

“disabled people are either inspirational, or benefit cheats”

to avoid being placed in the latter category, those with disabilities really try to seem inspirational/friendly

in order to feel you’re viewed positively, have to act in a way to align with other’s expectations - so that they ultimately treat you well

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

individuating information and stigma

A

compensatory strategy

divulging information that allows other to see one as an INDIVIDUAL rather than just a holder of a stigmatized identity

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

example of individuating information: Jennifer Richeson article

A

Richeson is a Black woman

first paragraph is about how she loves jelly beans

way of managing stereotypes associated with Blackness

playing up other aspects of people that are separate from typical categories

people read it and see her as a jelly bean liker (something they may have in common), as opposed to only having info that she’s a Black woman

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

expecting to be the target of prejudice: study SETUP

A
  1. manipulated stigma consciousness in ethnic minority individuals

EXPERIMENTAL: read article about how minorities are often targets of racist remarks in social interactions

CONTROL: read article about discrimination against elderly

  1. ethnic minorities then had convo with White partner
  2. reported on the experience
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

expecting to be the target of prejudice: study RESULTS

A

heightened stigma consciousness led ethnic minorities….

a) to have more NEGATIVE emotions

b) to feel LESS AUTHENTIC

c) to LIKE their convo partner LESS

CAVEAT: White people who had more stigma-conscious convo partners reported having more POSITIVE experiences

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

expecting to be the target of prejudice: study CAVEAT

A

White people who had more stigma-conscious convo partners reported having more POSITIVE experiences

why? prob because ethnic minorities who had their stigma consciousness raised went out of their way to behave in a way that conformed to the White person’s expectations

self-fulfilling prophecy

makes the interaction go smoothly - but also makes the stigmatized person feel worse about themself because they’re suppressing parts of their identity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

confronting discrimination: 3 important questions

A
  1. why don’t people confront?
  2. when do people confront?
  3. what makes for an effective confrontation?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

desert island confronting discrimination study SETUP

A

women participated in a “group decision making” study with 2 other people

problem: pick 12 people out of a list of 30 who would be best suited to survive together on a desert island

during group discussion, male confederate made sexist statements

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

desert island confronting discrimination study: sexist comments made by men

A

a) “yeah, we definitely need to keep the women in shape”

b) “let me see, maybe a chef? no, one of the women can cook”

c) “I think we need more women on the island to keep the men satisfied”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

desert island confronting discrimination study RESULTS

A

55% of women didn’t confront the man

25% directly confronted (ie. said it was sexist)

20% indirectly confronted the man

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

desert island confronting discrimination study: examples of indirect confrontations

A
  1. comment about task (“you can’t pick for that reason. pick another person”)
  2. surprise (“oh my god, I can’t believe you said that”)
  3. humor/sarcasm
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

what aspects of the target will make us more or less likely to confront? reword this question

A

can the same comment coming from different people result in differences in confrontation?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

confronting discrimination age manipulation study SETUP

A

non-Black participants read about a hypothetical scenario that involved a prejudiced expression

across conditions, AGE of target was either 42, 62 or 82

“yesterday, John (a 42/62/82 year old) White man was on the bus. After a few stops, a Black family boarded and sat down near John. Shortly after the family sat down, John muttered, “these Black people can’t even control their children.” He then got up, walked down the aisle, and held a handrail. John didn’t get off at the next stop.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

confronting discrimination age manipulation study RESULTS

A
  1. relative to when target was 42 or 62 years old, people were LESS WILLING to confront the 82 year old target
  2. also thought the incident was LESS OFFENSIVE and that the person was LESS INTENTIONAL ABOUT BEING OFFENSIVE when it was an 82 year old versus a 42 or 62 year old
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

confronting discrimination age manipulation study: FOLLOW UP ANALYSES SHOW…

A

this behaviour was driven by PERCEPTIONS OF MALLEABILITY

older people are seen as less malleable, so it makes less sense to confront them

judgments weren’t related to constructs like respect towards older adults or perceived social influence of adults

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

confronting discrimination - reactions of stigmatized group members to online comment STUDY SETUP

A

studied reactions of stigmatized group members (East or South Asian) to someone who confronted a prejudiced comment on social media

  1. studied whether the person used an AGGRESSIVE versus PASSIVE confrontation approach
  2. studied whether the person was an INGROUP versus OUTGROUP member
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

confronting discrimination - reactions of stigmatized group members to online comment STUDY EXAMPLE CONFRONTATIONS

A
  1. more aggressive, from outgroup member:

comment: “maybe if Asians opened their eyes wider, they’d be able to see the road”

confrontation: “I can’t believe you would post this, maybe you should open YOUR eyes and realize that what you’re saying is rude and racist”

  1. less aggressive, from ingroup member:

comment: “I don’t feel comfortable bringing my dog to my Asian friend’s house, his parents might steal and cook him”

confrontation: “people don’t just cook pets, I’m sure they shop at the grocery store”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

reactions of stigmatized group members to online comment STUDY RESULTS

A

statements that received an AGGRESSIVE CONFRONTATION were seen as MORE OFFENSIVE than those receiving a passive confrontation

despite the fact that all statements were pre-tested to be equally offensive

shows that people are doing inference work here - infer that the comment must have been bad in order to merit aggressive reaction

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

reactions of stigmatized group members to online comment - RESULTS WERE PARTICULARLY TRUE FOR…

A

statements that were confronted by OUTGROUP members (these statements were seen as even more offensive)

outgroup members that responded in an aggressive manner were also LIKED MORE

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

reactions of stigmatized group members to online comment - outgroup members that responded in aggressive manner were also liked more…

A

despite outgroup confronters’ power to shape perceptions of the racist post…

they were ONLY seen positively if they confronted in an aggressive manner

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

reactions of stigmatized group members to online comment - under which sole condition were outgroup confronters seen positively?

A

only when they confronted in an AGGRESSIVE manner

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

study: using social media to confront online hate speech

A

used twitter bots to respond to hate speech using different strategies

researchers compared counter-messages based in:

a) humour
b) warnings of consequences
c) empathy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

using social media to confront online hate speech study: response examples

A

humour:
“please sir, stop tweeting” bird meme

warnings of consequences: “remember that those you care about can see this post too…”

empathy:
“using language like this is just unnecessarily hurtful towards immigrants”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

using social media to confront online hate speech study RESULTS

A

empathy-based approaches led to:

  1. more tweets being deleted
  2. less xenophobic tweets being made by the confronted account

so, reminding people about how hate speech will make others feel is the best approach

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

4 reasons why people don’t directly confront

A
  1. normative to not engage with prejudiced people
  2. social norm to be polite if you do respond
  3. concern about retaliation
  4. diffusion of responsibility (bystander effect)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q

the long road to confrontation

A

there are so many steps between witnessing/experiencing a DISCRIMINATORY EVENT and CONFRONTING the perpetrator

need to say “yes” 5 times in order to make it to the confronting behaviour

if you say “no” at any of these steps, you will not confront

so much easier to get a no response

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

5 steps in confronting discrimination

A
  1. event interpreted as discrimination
  2. discriminatory incident is “an emergency”
  3. take responsibility
  4. knowing how to help
  5. taking action
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

discriminatory incident is “an emergency”: confronting discrimination

A

a step that needs to be taken in order to confront discrimination

  1. is the incident serious enough?
  2. was the perpetrator blameworthy?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

take responsibility: confronting discrimination

A

a step that needs to be taken in order to confront discrimination

diffusion of responsibility: each bystander’s sense of responsibility to help decreases as the number of witnesses increases

“someone else will handle this”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q

knowing how to help: confronting discrimination

A

a step that needs to be taken in order to confront discrimination

how to confront the perpetrator without escalating the conflict?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q

taking action: confronting discrimination

A

a step that needs to be taken in order to confront discrimination

weighing the risks, costs and benefits

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

example of confronting discrimination: Muslim woman at Texas bakery

A

paid actor woman and employee

employee refused service to her because of her ethnicity and religion

said blatantly racist things, called her a terrorist etc.

filmed bystander reactions

13 stood up for her

6 participated in the discrimination

22 did nothing - this is a real problem

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q

what makes for an effective confrontation?

A
  1. focus on BEHAVIOUR/others’ reactions instead of a person’s CHARACTER

“that word made me feel uncomfortable” is better than “you’re racist”

  1. being a member of the non-stigmatized group

a) White confronter of anti-Black racism
b) male confronter of anti-female sexism

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
54
Q

Kim Chaney

A

assistant prof at Uni of Connecticut

expert on stereotyping and prejudice, specifically on “lay theories of prejudice” (how people think prejudice works)

lead author on 2023 paper looking at age-related beliefs and likelihood of confronting prejudice

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
55
Q

refresher: when contact works

A
  1. support of authorities
  2. equal status
  3. common goals
  4. cooperation
  5. contact as individuals

(Allport’s ideas)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
56
Q

review of social identity theory: basic principles

A
  1. we strive to achieve & maintain a POSITIVE social identity
  2. we strive to DISTINGUISH our own social groups from other social groups
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
57
Q

how could we use social identity to reduce prejudice?

A

social categorization precedes prejudice, stereotyping & discrimination

KEY IDEA: change how we categorize, and intergroup biases will follow suit

categories are fluid: we can see someone we normally consider an outgroup member as an ingroup member in a specific context

leverage the malleability of categories to reduce prejudice

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
58
Q

individuation

A

perceiving the person as a unique individual rather than as a group member

individuation is a bit different than re-categorization

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
59
Q

re-categorization

A

changing the basis by which you socially categorize someone

  1. focusing on a different social category
  2. focusing on a common ingroup identity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
60
Q

black athletes & disliked white people study SETUP

A

IAT with an intentional confound - Good/Bad and Black/White

White disliked politicians and Black admired athletes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
61
Q

black athletes & disliked white people study RESULTS

A

OCCUPATION categorization: pro-Athlete bias
a) which indirectly translates to a pro-Black bias because all the athletes are black

RACE categorization: pro-White bias remains

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q

black athletes & disliked white people study - focuses on what kind of re-categorization?

A

focusing on a different social category

on admired athlete as opposed to solely Black

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
63
Q

re-categorization: focus on a common group identity

A

ingroup vs outgroup:
“I’m Black and you’re Asian”

COMMON group identity:
“we’re both part of this company”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
64
Q

reducing transphobia field experiment SETUP

A

canvassers attempted to encourage ‘ANALOGIC PERSPECTIVE TAKING’

  1. first asked each voter about a time when they themselves were judged negatively for being different
  2. then encouraged voters to see how their own experience offered window into transgender people’s experiences, hoping to facilitate perspective-taking
  3. then another attempt to encourage active processing by asking voters to describe if and how the exercise changed their mind

note: convos lasted around 10 mins on average

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
65
Q

reducing transphobia field experiment - example of what kind of re-categorization?

A

creating a common identity

positive effects present 3 days, 3 weeks, 6 weeks and 3 months later

simply from a 10 minute interaction

perspective-taking really had an effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
66
Q

social categorization paradox

A

for an individual to effectively change stereotypes about their group, they have to:

  1. be ATYPICAL (because they’re defying the stereotype)
  2. be PERCEIVED as TYPICAL of their group (so that the effects generalize to larger group)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
67
Q

social categorization paradox example

A

ellen degeneres

she defies gay stereotype - because she has this huge show that’s doing super well and is widely-liked

^atypical enough to challenger perception of gay identity

but she is also gay-typical enough that the effect can generalize to a larger group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
68
Q

social categorization paradox can also apply to how members of stigmatized groups think about…

A

role models

have to be counter-stereotypical enough to challenge negative perceptions of that identity/reach success/role model status

but also have to be similar enough to their group for other members to identify with them

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
69
Q

role models study setup

A

sample of undergrad women

read profiles about women in leadership positions

after reading profile, students took survey about their:
a) accomplishments
b) life goals
c) personal characteristics

then, got “feedback” (random assignment)
a) similar and attainable
b) dissimilar and unattainable

then, took self-leadership IAT

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
70
Q

role models study: example of a profile of a woman in a leadership position

A

“Jane Goodall’s brilliance distinguished her from her peers right after high school. recognizing her genius, Louis Leaky, the famous anthropologist, invited her to record the behaviour of chimpanzees in Tanzania where she started the very first and longest continuous field study of chimpanzees in their natural habitat”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
71
Q

role models study: two feedback conditions

A
  1. similar and attainable

“you are quite similar to the women leaders you read about earlier…likely to achieve similar success…achievement-oriented..powerful” etc.

  1. dissimilar and unattainable

“you are quite different from the women leaders…a nurturing individual…give others’ needs priority…suited for supportive positions” etc

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
72
Q

role models study RESULTS

A

results of the self-leadership IAT

other/self and supporter/leader

women associated themselves more with supporters if given DISSIMILAR & UNATTAINABLE

women associated themselves more with leaders if given SIMILAR & ATTAINABLE

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
73
Q

role models study FOLLOW-UP RESEARCH

A

higher perceived similarity with counter-stereotypical role models = greater aspirations to follow in their footsteps

74
Q

study that takes a distinct approach: ‘moral’ role models

A

Thinking About God Encourages Prosociality Toward Religious Outgroups: A Cross-Cultural Investigation

Pasek et al

75
Q

power of ‘thinking about god’ study SETUP

A

combined samples of:

1) Christians/Hindus/Muslims in Fiji
2) American Christians
3) Israeli Jews
4) Palestinian Muslims

participants played game measuring pro-social behaviour (the Dictator game - about money allocation)

^paired with either a religious ingroup or outgroup member

across rounds of game, participants were either told to “think carefully” or to “think about god” before responding

76
Q

power of ‘thinking about god’ study SAMPLES

A

Christians/Hindus/Muslims in Fiji

American Christians

Israeli Jews

Palestinian Muslims

77
Q

power of ‘thinking about god’ study GAME PLAYED

A

Dictator game

measures pro-social behaviour

money-sharing task

78
Q

power of ‘thinking about god’ study - what were participants told to think about?

A
  1. “think carefully”
  2. “think about god”
79
Q

power of ‘thinking about god’ study RESULTS

A

thinking about god made people MORE PROSOCIAL (generous) when INTERACTING with STRANGER

STRONGER results when stranger was a “fellow believer” (someone who was of a different religion)

but generosity ALSO INCREASED towards ATHEISTS

80
Q

power of ‘thinking about god’ study RESULTS DIDN’T DEPEND ON…

A

didn’t depend on participants’ OWN perceptions of “ingroup commonality”

ingroup commonality: how similar they thought people from other religious groups were

81
Q

power of ‘thinking about god’ study STRONGEST RESULTS

A

strongest results of increased prosocial behaviour was for FELLOW BELIEVERS (those from a different religion)

who were told to “think about god”

82
Q

power of ‘thinking about god’ study CONCLUDING PARAGRAPHS

A

thinking about god encouraged prosociality across religious divides. in contrast to the idea that belief in a god or gods fuels divisiveness between ethno-religious groups, such belief may encourage generosity beyond the ingroup.

since people view god as a supporter of all humanity, thinking about god may increase prosocial behaviour towards all people, regardless of whether they share the same religion as you, or whether they even believe in god at all

83
Q

history of thinking about changing ‘implicit bias’

A

implicit bias here refers to things measured by the IAT

1985-2001 - viewed as STABLE and RIGID

2001-present - viewed as MALLEABLE and FLEXIBLE

now people think that at any individual moment, IAT scores depend on what is currently activated in one’s mind

how much prejudice is showing depends on what people are thinking about in the moment

although general implicit prejudice is pretty stable (it just has a range)

84
Q

2 big questions when thinking about reducing ‘implicit bias’

A
  1. what are the most EFFECTIVE approaches?
  2. how DURABLE are intervention effects?
85
Q

research contest: changing implicit biases

A

open call for ideas - think tank concept

18 teams of social psychologists each submitted a framework for changing IAT results

compared all 18 of the methods

86
Q

implicit biases research contest GOAL

A

reduce implicit preferences for white over black people

87
Q

implicit biases research contest DESCRIPTION

A

a) 4 studies

b) 18 interventions + 1 baseline control

c) interventions = 5 mins or less

d) assessment = right after intervention

88
Q

implicit biases research contest SAMPLE

A

non-Black participants on Project Implicit

total N = 17 021

89
Q

implicit biases research contest INTERVENTION CATEGORIES

A
  1. counter stereotypes
  2. values
  3. controlling bias
  4. perspective taking
90
Q

implicit biases research contest COUNTER STEREOTYPE INTERVENTION

A

giving people a very disliked White person (famous criminal)

and a very liked Black person (Oprah)

OR

have a white person threatening you and posing as a danger

and then a black person saves you

91
Q

implicit biases research contest PERSPECTIVE TAKING

A

imagine yourself in situation where you’re living experience of a black person

  1. show a pic of a black woman
  2. say this person just graduated from law school
  3. “imagine you are this person”
  4. “describe how you’re feeling”
92
Q

implicit biases research contest VALUES

A

ie. multiculturalism/diversity

“understanding both similarities and differences among ethnic groups is an essential component of long-term social harmony in the US”

93
Q

implicit biases research contest CONTROLLING BIAS/IMPLEMENTATION INTENTIONS

A

If I see a black face, then I will respond by thinking ‘good’

strategy for approaching the task

94
Q

implicit biases research contest RESULTS

A

COUNTER-STEREOTYPES and STRATEGIES TO CONTROL BIAS are effective for reducing implicit prejudice

REFLECTING ON VALUES and PERSPECTIVE-TAKING aren’t effective for reducing implicit prejudice

MOST EFFECTIVE interventions were:
a) emotional
b) self-relevant
c) targeting ingroup favouritism & outgroup hatred

95
Q

implicit biases research contest - most effective interventions were…

A

a) emotional

b) self-relevant

c) targeting ingroup favouritism & outgroup hatred

96
Q

implicit biases research contest PHASE TWO question

A

how durable were these effects?

97
Q

implicit biases research contest PHASE TWO goal

A

reduce implicit biases after 24 hour delay

98
Q

implicit biases research contest PHASE TWO description

A

9 effective interventions from Phase 1

follow-up session after 24 hours

99
Q

implicit biases research contest PHASE TWO sample

A

non-Black students from 18 universities

(partnered with researchers from tons of institutions - Yale, Purdue, UC Davis etc)

N = 5295

100
Q

implicit biases research contest PHASE TWO results

A

time 1: right after intervention

a) interventions were effective in reducing bias in IAT scores

time 2: 24 hours later

a) the effects didn’t last

b) so IAT results really rely on what you’re thinking about in the short term

101
Q

implicit bias is ___ in the short term and ___ in the long term

A

malleable

stable

interventions are overpowered by hardwired associations

102
Q

long term changes in implicit bias

A
  1. intergroup contact

a) ie. freshman year roommate being part of a diff race/culture

  1. conditioning

a) but requires 13 sessions, with 225 trials per session

103
Q

details on conditioning to change implicit bias

A

visually pairing something you have negative associations with and something positive (ie. cute puppy)

but time consuming

13 sessions, each with 225 trials

104
Q

meta-analysis: short term changes in implicit bias SETUP

A

meta-analysis of 492 studies (> 87 000 participants)

looked at effectiveness of various interventions to change biases in implicit associations

intervention examples:
a) weaken association directly/indirectly
b) strengthen association directly/indirectly
c) goals to weaken bias
d) affirmation
e) threat
etc.

105
Q

meta-analysis: short term changes in implicit bias RESULTS

A

do changes in implicit associations mediate changes in behaviour?

in the aggregate, procedures DIDN’T produce significant indirect effects

mediation results are NOT CONSISTENT with a causal relationship between change in implicit measures and changes in behaviour

106
Q

meta-analysis: short term changes in implicit bias TAKEAWAY

A

changes in IAT scores don’t really translate into changing behaviour

107
Q

an alternative approach to reducing discrimination

A

treat discrimination as a DESIGN problem rather than an ATTITUDE/BELIEF problem

changing the context so that pre-existing biases won’t operate

not allowing biases to emerge, through changing the environment/procedures (in hiring, for example)

108
Q

when is discrimination likely to happen?

A
  1. information is UNCLEAR or COMPLEX
  2. decision-making criteria are SUBJECTIVE
109
Q

example: ambiguity and subjectivity leading to discrimination

A

Michael versus Michelle police chief decision

if you don’t lay out the value you would prefer in police chief before the decision (educated vs street smart), then you choose Michael

but when you decide the value first, you choose the candidate that matches it

PICK POLICE CHIEF CONSISTENT WITH VALUE, REGARDLESS OF GENDER

110
Q

extending subjectivity/ambiguity leading to discrimination to coffee shop

A

just a way of thinking about the concept

coffee shop sign: “are you having a good day? yes or no?”

arrows lead from each option to “treat yourself”

use second-order justification for a decision not based in objectivity or fact

111
Q

ambiguity and subjectivity: “brilliance bias”

A

charting correlation between fields believed to rely on “innate genius” and proportion of women in these fields

more men in “genius” fields

“genius” qualities AND hiring process can be ambiguous and subjective

people may have a preference to hire men in this field

and say “he’s a genius, I just know it” to justify their decision to hire a man over a woman

not a strong definition of a good candidate, so implicit associations come in and influence hiring

112
Q

beware of “cultural fit”

A

in hiring, some candidates will be hired or not chosen based on “fit” with the company

“fit” isn’t well defined/articulated

can be used to justify hiring/rejection of people that is really rooted in other biases

113
Q

how to overcome the “cultural fit” phenomenon

A
  1. align your definition of “cultural fit” with your GOALS
  2. ask STRUCTURED interview questions
  3. create a CHECKLIST for indicators of fit
  4. put CONSTRAINTS on how much fit matters
114
Q

how to prevent discrimination rooted in ambiguity and subjectivity?

A
  1. pre-commit to decision-making criteria
  2. remove irrelevant group-based info (ie. hometown, university, name)
115
Q

Martin Luther King quote - downsides of prejudice reduction

A

“True peace is not merely the absence of tension: it is the presence of justice”

lots of interventions focus on getting people to think everything is fine

instead of highlighting deeper issues about intergroup biases

116
Q

downsides of prejudice reduction

A

for disadvantaged group members, reducing prejudice toward the advantaged outgroup through intergroup contact

can REDUCE SUPPORT for collective action to ADDRESS INEQUALITIES

117
Q

downsides of prejudice reduction: positive contact with advantaged outgroup leads to…

A
  1. REDUCED IDENTIFICATION with disadvantaged ingroup
  2. perception of outgroup ADVANTAGE as FAIR
  3. perception that STATUS QUO is LEGIT
118
Q

Mikey Pasek

A

assistant prof at Uni of Illinois at Chicago

expert on intergroup relations (specifically prejudices and discrimination based in religion)

lead author on 2023 paper looking at how changing perception of god led to reduced religious prejudice

119
Q

the problem with overconfidence

A

we are overconfident in our OBJECTIVITY

120
Q

the bias blindspot SETUP

A

describe a prominent bias, then ask:

a) “to what extent do you think that YOU show this tendency?

b) “to what extent do you think that the AVERAGE AMERICAN shows this tendency?”

121
Q

the bias blindspot RESULTS

A

kind of like the better than average effect

sample of 661

563 (85%) said they were LESS BIASED than average

97 (15%) said they were AVERAGE

0 said they were MORE BIASED

122
Q

the bias blindspot EXPLANATION

A

when asked “to what extent do you think that YOU show this tendency”, we have ACCESS to our OWN THOUGHTS

a) we know/craft our justifications

when asked “to what extent do you think that the AVERAGE AMERICAN shows this tendency”, we only have access to OTHERS’ ACTIONS

123
Q

possible solution to the bias blindspot

A
  1. self-auditing
  2. create practices to circumvent your biases
124
Q

self-auditing

A

ask yourself, “if I was biased, what could I do to not act out my biases/use them to make decisions?”

you aren’t admitting to being biased

but you’re saying there’s a chance you are, and committing to act to limit biases

125
Q

solution to bias blindspot applied to hiring process

A
  1. who sees our ADS?
  2. who APPLIES to the job?
  3. who gets PAST THE FIRST CUT?
  4. who gets an INTERVIEW?
  5. who gets an OFFER?
  6. who ACCEPTS the offer?
  7. who STAYS?
126
Q

in many contexts, discrimination can arise not solely from BIAS but also from what?

A

noise!

more general inaccuracy in judgment or evaluation

127
Q

noise and hiring example

A

say your hiring is 60% accurate

60% of hires are men, 40% are women

when you do make ERRORS, they AREN’T EQUALLY DISTRIBUTED ACROSS GROUPS

ie. men: 75% of errors are BENEFICIAL (hired when under-qualified) and 25% are DETRIMENTAL (not hired when qualified)

ie. women: 25% of errors are BENEFICIAL, 75% are DETRIMENTAL

128
Q

2 interventions: noise and hiring

A
  1. reducing gender-based favouritism (bias approach)
  2. increasing evaluation accuracy (methods approach)
129
Q

noise and hiring: intervention 1 SETUP

A

give a workshop on how gender is an active bias in hiring process

this doesn’t really make your hiring more accurate (still at 60%) BUT it reduces impact of bias

130
Q

noise and hiring: intervention 1 RESULTS

A

accuracy stays at 60%

but now the split of hires is more equal:

now it’s a 52% men to 48% women split

errors have been more evenly distributed across men and women

131
Q

noise and hiring: intervention 2 SETUP

A

workshop on picking out qualified applicants

don’t mention gender biases

132
Q

noise and hiring: intervention 2 RESULTS

A

accuracy rises from 60% to 92%

but retain the same split of errors across genders

75-25 beneficial-detrimental = men
25-75 beneficial-detrimental = women

bias isn’t impacted

133
Q

Axt and Lai found that interventions impact bias and noise…

A

differently

used decision making task that produced discrimination based on PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS

  1. forcing participants to SLOW DOWN reduced noise but not bias
  2. WARNING participants to avoid using physical attractiveness reduced bias but not noise
134
Q

example of an applied effort to reduce prejudice & discrimination

A

Life after Genocide - New Dawn Soap Opera

135
Q

Life after Genocide SETUP

A

communities randomly assigned:

a) RECONCILIATION-FOCUSED soap opera
b) HEALTH soap opera

reconciliation-focused one:
a) featured TYPICAL RWANDANS as protagonists
b) roots of prejudice & violence = located in frustration of BASIC PSYCH NEEDS
c) trauma is NORMAL, HEALABLE

136
Q

Life after Genocide RESULTS

A
  1. didn’t change personal beliefs about prejudice & violence
  2. changed perceived norms about how people do/should behave in situations related to prejudice, conflict, trauma
  3. increased empathy for genocide survivors
  4. more likely to share radio batteries at end of study
137
Q

paradoxical thinking

A

more recent approach to reducing prejudice/discrimination

trying to change attitudes by presenting NEW INFO that is CONSISTENT with one’s beliefs

but SO EXTREME that it leads one to paradoxically PERCEIVE THEIR OWN BELIEFS AS IRRATIONAL

138
Q

argument behind paradoxical thinking

A

argument is that “individuals who are provided with extreme information or instructions that are in line with their held beliefs may change them even when they are extremely negative and well-entrenched”

139
Q

paradoxical thinking originates from what branch of psych?

A

clinical research

140
Q

paradoxical thinking: Israeli Jew study SETUP

A

investigated attitudes/beliefs of 161 Israeli Jews over course of one election year

‘paradoxical thinking’ intervention: watching clips that each made argument for why it is essential to have a sustained conflict with Palestinians

141
Q

example of a vid clip from Israeli Jew paradoxical thinking study

A

“we need conflict with the Palestinians in order to have the strongest army in the world”

“in order to feel moral, we need the conflict”

these lead to self-questioning

142
Q

paradoxical thinking: Israeli Jew study RESULTS

A

participants in paradoxical thinking intervention were:

  1. more supportive of policy that evacuated Israeli settlements as means of achieving peace with Palestinians
  2. more likely to vote in elections for political candidates that had less “hawkish”/”pro-conflict” positions towards Palestinians
143
Q

paradoxical thinking: Israeli Jew study - follow-up work suggests that these paradoxical thinking interventions are effective because…

A

of their ability to evoke feelings of:

a) IDENTITY THREAT
b) SURPRISE

among participants

144
Q

hypocrisy induction is similar to…

A

paradoxical thinking

145
Q

hypocrisy induction: reducing prejudice towards Muslims in Spain SETUP

A

HYPOCRISY CONDITION:

a) participants read summaries of acts of mass violence committed by White Europeans

b) then answered question about how responsible Europeans as a whole are for such acts
(said not responsible)

c) then completed the same measures, but now about 2015 Paris attacks led by Muslim extremists

146
Q

hypocrisy induction: reducing prejudice towards Muslims in Spain RESULTS

A

gets people to recognize the inconsistency in their thinking

they don’t blame Europeans as a whole for mass violence committed by some White Europeans

so why do they generalize attacks headed by Muslims to all Muslims?

it’s irrational

hypocrisy condition REDUCED COLLECTIVE BLAME towards Muslims IMMEDIATELY, ONE MONTH and ONE YEAR LATER

147
Q

hypocrisy induction: reducing prejudice towards Muslims in Spain - how long did the effects last?

A

effects were immediate

AND

persisted one month and one year later

148
Q

hypocrisy induction-ish

A

ad in Montreal metro

“phobias are irrational fears”

then poster of chicken and someone screaming (chicken fear = irrational)

then poster of dropping phone (phone losing = irrational)

THEN poster of rainbow - says HOMOPHOBIA IS ALSO IRRATIONAL

149
Q

reducing inequalities in education: the problem

A

large and persistent gaps in academic achievement based on DEMOGRAPHIC status

GPA gap

graduate rate gap

150
Q

reducing inequalities in education: the causes

A
  1. structural causes
  2. psychological causes
151
Q

structural causes for inequalities in education

A

a) unequal school funding

b) lack of access to opportunities

c) intergenerational transmission of social & cultural capital

152
Q

psychological causes for inequalities in education

A

a) stereotype threat

b) dis-identification from stereotyped domains

153
Q

5 interventions to reduce inequalities in education

A

increasing achievement among UNDER-REPRESENTED MINORITIES & FIRST-GEN students:

  1. academic value
  2. growth mindset
  3. social belonging
  4. personal values
  5. empathic discipline
154
Q

academic value intervention

A

students reflect on why course topics are useful and important in their own lives

why it works:
increases INTRINSIC MOTIVATION to do well in class

155
Q

academic value intervention study SETUP

A

9th grade science students sought to make connections between course material and everyday lives

randomly assigned within each class to write about either:

a. usefulness/utility value of the material in their own lives (intervention)

b. summary of material they were studying (control)

156
Q

academic value intervention study RESULTS

A

divided into students with LOW versus HIGH EXPECTATIONS

INTEREST:

a) low expectations: higher interest in the class for intervention compared to control

b) high expectations: no difference between control and intervention

GRADES:

a) low expectations: higher increase in grades in intervention

b) less difference in high expectation group

157
Q

academic value intervention study TAKEAWAY

A

if you have low expectations of how well you’ll do in a class…

writing about relevance of course material:

a. increases INTEREST
b. improves GRADES

158
Q

growth mindset intervention

A

teaching students that intelligence is MALLEABLE, not fixed

why it works:
increases motivation to try harder when faced with adversity

159
Q

growth mindset intervention study SETUP

A

6000+ high school students did a 1 hour online training session that sought to INSTIL GROWTH MINDSET

belief that “brain is like a muscle that grows stronger and smarter when it undergoes rigorous learning experiences”

pre-registered hypothesis: will intervention be particularly effective among LOW/MIDDLE-ACHIEVING kids?

160
Q

growth mindset intervention study RESULTS

A

among lower-achieving students, receiving the intervention led to an average increase of:

0.10 points in 9th grade GPA

161
Q

growth mindset intervention study: effects of intervention were HIGHER AMONG SCHOOLS THAT…

A

had more SUPPORTIVE NORMS in terms of challenge-seeking

as measured by percentage of students in that school who chose to complete a more difficult (but educational) worksheet when given choice

162
Q

growth mindset intervention study: intervention effects were STRONGEST in…

A

medium-achieving, supportive schools

163
Q

social belonging intervention

A

students read testimonials about how more senior students had worried whether they belonged in college in first year

but that it gets better over time

why it works:
reduces tendency to think “I don’t belong here” when faced with adversity

164
Q

belonging uncertainty

A

common concern among Black college students

can lead students to perceive common challenges (like exclusion from social outing or receiving critical academic feedback) as CONFIRMING they don’t belong

perception becomes self-fulfilling

165
Q

belonging uncertainty study SETUP

A

looked to intervene with belonging uncertainty

had racial minority college students watch video where older students from same racial background talked about their own college transition

tracked participants over time

166
Q

belonging uncertainty study GOAL

A

represent challenging times in college as normal, as “due to the transition itself”

rather than evidence of permanent lack of belonging on the part of the self/one’s group

167
Q

belonging uncertainty study RESULTS

A

despite only 8% remembering the video, being in treatment condition showed LONG-LASTING EFFECTS

Black participants reported:

a. greater SATISFACTION WITH EMPLOYMENT
B. greater overall WELLBEING

8 and a half years later!!

however, treatment condition members didn’t show significant gains in OBJECTIVE MEASURES of employment success (income)

168
Q

belonging uncertainty study - how long did the effects last?

A

8 and a half years

169
Q

belonging uncertainty study - potential mechanism

A

though not conclusive, one potential mechanism is that the intervention helped facilitate development of helpful MENTORING RELATIONSHIPS

170
Q

personal values intervention

A

writing about strengths that one holds/personal values

why it works:
affirms self-worth broadly, diminishing impact of academic adversity on self-worth

171
Q

personal values intervention study SETUP

A

asked 7th graders to “reflect on an important personal value, such as relationships with friends/family or musical interests”

writing practice is meant to reduce psychological stress and improve self worth

172
Q

personal values intervention study RESULTS

A

if already a high-performer, intervention didn’t affect much

if LOW-PERFORMER, writing about personal strength INCREASED GPA

impact persisted for 2 years

173
Q

empathic discipline intervention

A

essentially a FAE intervention

a. provide TEACHERS with NON-PEJORATIVE reasons for why students may misbehave at school (ie. changes in adolescence)

b. discourage labeling of students as ‘TROUBLEMAKERS’

why it works:
encourages teachers to view school discipline as an opportunity to develop MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING and BETTER RELATIONSHIPS with students

174
Q

empathic discipline intervention adopts a different approach in that…

A

the TARGET of this intervention are TEACHERS/ADMINISTRATORS rather than students

175
Q

empathic discipline intervention STUDY SETUP

A

assigned teachers to read an article supporting a “punitive mindset” or an “empathic mindset”

punitive mindset reminded teachers that “punishment is critical for teachers to take control of the classroom”

empathic mindset argued that “good teacher-student relationships are critical for students to learn self-control”

176
Q

empathic discipline intervention: empathic mindset condition excerpt

A

“I would give the class some work to do and then I would talk to (the student) privately. he has a need that is not being met. I would try to understand the need and try to meet it”

177
Q

empathic discipline intervention STUDY RESULTS

A

middle-school teachers who were randomly assigned to undergo a similar empathic mindset training showed a 50% REDUCTION in SUSPENSIONS given over the course of the following year

178
Q

the 5 interventions to reduce inequalities in education each adopt different strategies, but each…

A

argues that psychological change can be achieved through RECURSIVE PROCESSES

179
Q

recursive processes

A

what all 5 education inequality interventions have in common

interventions aren’t just useful during the study

their EFFECTS PERSIST - they last and CHANGE YOUR THINKING STYLE in a productive way that continues to build on itself

cement helpful strategies that will frame your future thinking

180
Q

Shannon Brady

A

assistant prof at Wake Forest Uni

expert on social identity and interventions to reduce intergroup disparities

particular focus on reducing inequalities in EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT

lead author on 2020 paper investigating how “social belonging” intervention improved academic achievement among Black students

Psyc 331 (7 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions