Prejudice continued and reduction Flashcards
(42 cards)
What is Social Identity Theory?
Proposed by Tajfel and Turner (1970s) = theory of intergroup conflict + considered major theories in social psych.
Uses minimum group studies methodology to examine whether prejudice exist outside
of competition over resources
Aims = to identify when do people think of themselves as ‘we’ (social identity) than ‘I’ (personal identity).
What happened in Tajfel et al. (1971)?
Ps assigned to 1/2 groups randomly, don’t know other Ps + no contact.
Procedure = ps led to private publics + asked to allocate points (turn to £) to:
- 2 members of in-group
- 2 outgroup
- 1 outgroup + 1 ingroup
How they allocate points = didn’t affect the monetary allocations of their participation for the study. Choice not drive by personal greed.
What is the minimal group paradigm matrix?
Distribution strategies:
- fairness
- max. in-group
- max. joint profit = both groups get the most poss.
- max. differentiation = try to favour/ make superior a spec. group
Which strategy in allocating to 2 diff. in-group members in minimum group studies (Tajefel et al., 1971) was most popular?
Fairness was the popular
Which strategy in allocating to 2 diff. out-group members in minimum group studies (Tajefel et al., 1971) was most popular?
fairness
Which strategy in allocating to 1 in-group + 1 outgroup members in minimum group studies (Tajefel et al., 1971) was most popular?
in-group favouritism = more points to ingroup than outgroup
Ps care about relative standing rather than absolute standing of the group.
discrimination favouring ungroup happens w/out conflict history + contact
What is the mere categorisation effect?
Categorizing people into different social groups is sufficient for creating ethnocentrism.
What does supporting evidence show about the mere categorisation effect?
Hundreds of minimal group experiments = that
mere categorisation produces ethnocentrism +
competitive intergroup behavior.
Mechanisms for minimal ingroup bias are unclear + different explanations exist.
BUT results interpreted as evidence show = psychological motivation operating in individuals to defend group interests regardless of self-interest.
Why do we think of our identity as ‘we’ rather than ‘I’?
Social identification = indvdl’s self-concept deriving from membership knowledge of a social group (or groups) + emotional significance attached to that membership” (Tajfel, 1974, p.69).
- Varies among individuals
- Varies depending on context (group identity
can become more salient)
What are the effects of groups on SIT?
Group membership influences self-definition, self-value People are motivated to feel pos. abt ourselves.
Tajfel (1978) = group member identify strongly w/ in-group makes distinctions from outgrips on dimensions valued by the perceiver
What is the importance of pos. distinctiveness in SIT?
Leads to in-group favouritism
Need can be achieved by:
- highlighting DMNs where the in-group is superior to the outgroup
- actively disparage/ discriminate against the outgroup to create/ reinforce an existing heriacy
How is SIT linked to immigrants?
Immigrants = based on national group membership. Variation in national identification = impact attitudes towards them,
SIT predicts greater national identification = greater prejudice towards immigrants
Several supporting empirical European evidence (e.g Billiet et al., 2003)
What is a drawback on the links between immigrants + SIT?
National attachment doesn’t necessarily lead to prejudice toward immigrants = should distinguish between nationalism + patriotism.
Measures: e.g. ‘In view of America’s moral + material
superiority, it is only right that we should have the biggest say in deciding United Nations policy.’ Reflective of nationalism
What is nationalism?
Kosterman & Feshbach (1989):
“a belief in national superiority and dominance’ (p. 175)
- ‘feelings of nationalism are inherently comparative and almost exclusively, downward comparative’ (p. 178).
What is patriotism?
Loving one’s country without necessarily feeling
that one’s country is superior to others.
How does patriotism link to SIT?
Patriotism should not necessarily correlate pos. w/
prejudice toward outgroups, while nationalism should.
Series of studies w/ British respondents = national identification is assoc. w/ prejudice toward
asylum-seekers, especially indvdls who think that national group membership is based on ethnic (essentialist and unchangeable) attributes (Pehrson, Brown, & Zagefka, 2009)
How does patriotism compare in other countries?
Portugal = strong anti-racism norms after colonialism history
Vala et al. (2008) = found no link between national identification + prejudice toward immigrants in Portugal.
What matters = strength of national identification BUT ALSO what people understand their own identity to stand for (identity content, identity norms)
What is the role of threat perceptions as an explanation of prejudice (intergroup theories)
plays important role in explaining prejudice towards outgroups = various types of threats
Intergroup Threat Theory (Stephan & Stephan, 2000) = Threat comes about bc group members perceive themselves to be competing w/ outgroup over scarce material resources/ when they feel that their physical safety or power is endangered - realistic threats
What are role of threat perceptions in explaining prejudice?
Stephan & Stephan (2000)
Group members = threatened if they perceive the
outgroup to be a threat to their cultural values, religion, belief system, ideology, philosophy, morality or world: symbolic threat.
Meta-analytic findings: (Riek et al., 2006): realistic +
symbolic threats are associated. w/ neg. outgroup attitudes.
What did David and Essex (2001) find about threat perceptions?
immigrants = seen as a threat regardless of their success in the host country:
– If unsuccessful, they are perceived as a threat to
the country’s economic standing.
– If successful, they are viewed as competing with
the host society with jobs and other resources.
How does the government deal with threat perceptions and immigrants?
Not threats = perceived as real
Politicians sometimes blame immigrants for any
negative socioeconomic development, e.g.
unemployment, deficits in the health system,
problems in education: scapegoating of immigrants.
This leads to increased prejudice toward immigrants.
How does the media influence threat perceptions?
Media = big influence on perceptions of threat + immigrant attitudes.
Brosius and Esser (1995) found a significant relationship between media presentations of immigrants in Germany in the 1990s + hate crimes one week later (see also Koopmans & Olzack, 2004).
Can one theory explain all instances of prejudice?
NO
How can we reduce prejudice?
intergroup contact
social categorisation
other approaches
