Post on 24-Dec-2015
Stereotypes, Prejudice, & Discrimination
• True Colors– What are your thoughts?– Does it ring true?
– Can we use social psychological principles to understand what happened?
Stereotypes, Prejudice, & Discrimination
• stereotypes– a set of beliefs about the personal
attributes of a group of people (Ashmore & Del Boca, 1981)
– a type of schema
Stereotypes, Prejudice, & Discrimination
• prejudice– a biased evaluation of a group (often
targeted at it’s individual members), based on real or imagined characteristics of the group members (Nelson, 2002)
– a type of attitude
Stereotypes, Prejudice, & Discrimination
• discrimination– negative act towards a person or
group of people because of their group membership
Stereotypes, Prejudice, & Discrimination
• ABC’s of social psychology– Affect: prejudice– Behavior: discrimination– Cognition: stereotypes
Stereotypes, Prejudice, & Discrimination
• What did we see in True Colors?– What stereotypes?– What examples of prejudice?– What examples of discrimination?
Stereotypes
• How stereotypes are formed?– categorization– ingroups and outgroups (Social Identity
Theory; Tajfel & Turner, 1986)• ingroup bias (Ostrom & Sedikides, 1992)
• outgroup homogeneity bias (Hamilton, 1976)
Stereotypes
• stereotypes make information processing more efficient– name and 10 personality characteristics– Nigel: caring, honest, reliable, friendly…– stereotype: Nigel is a doctor– cognitive load task– recall characteristics and facts about
Indonesia
(Macrae, Milne, & Bodenhausen, 1994)
Stereotypes
(Macrae, Milne, & Bodenhausen, 1994)
0123456
789
Neut. St.Consis.
Indonesia
LabelNo Label
Stereotypes
• Why do stereotypes persist?– subcategorization– illusory correlations– selective attention to stereotype-
relevant information
Stereotypes
• Why do stereotypes persist?– subcategorization– illusory correlations– selective attention to stereotype-
relevant information– once formed, very difficult to change
Stereotypes
• stereotype threat– African American and White
participants– difficult verbal task– IV: intellectual ability (threat) or
verbal task (no threat)– DV: performance on the verbal task
(Steele & Aronson, 1995)
Stereotypes
• stereotype threat– no threat condition: AA and White
participants performed equally– threat condition: AA performed more
poorly than the White participants
– also shown to occur when race is made salient
(Steele & Aronson, 1995)
Origins of Prejudice
• social dynamics– Realistic Group Conflict Theory (Levine
& Campbell, 1972)
– Scapegoat Theory
Origins of Prejudice
• social dynamics– Realistic Group Conflict Theory (Levine
& Campbell, 1972)
– Scapegoat Theory– Just World Theory
What Can Be Done about Prejudice?
• stereotype suppression– 5 minutes writing about a skinhead– IV: suppress negative thoughts or not– 5 minutes writing about the second
skinhead– DV: How stereotypic is the writing?
(Macrae, Milne, & Bodenhausen, 1994)
What Can Be Done about Prejudice?
• stereotype suppression– suppression condition: less
stereotypic thinking the first time, but more stereotypic thinking the second time
(Macrae, Milne, & Bodenhausen, 1994)
What Can Be Done about Prejudice?
• contact hypothesis– increasing exposure to members of
outgroups can increase positive evaluations of the outgroup and decrease prejudice and stereotyping• e.g., Sherif’s Robber’s Cave studies
What Can Be Done about Prejudice?
• contact hypothesis– Allport (1954): “…the effect of
contact will depend on the kind of association that occurs, and on the kinds of persons who are involved.”
What Can Be Done about Prejudice?
• contact hypothesis– four necessary criteria:
• equal status members• common goals• intergroup cooperation• support of a legitimate authority (e.g.,
social norms)
(Allport, 1954)
What Can Be Done about Prejudice?
• contact hypothesis– an additional criterion:
• must be friendship potential
(Pettigrew, 1998)
What Can Be Done about Prejudice?
• Jigsaw Classroom– 6-person learning groups– each responsible for teaching and
learning the material– pay more attention to and respect
each other more
(Aronson, 1979)
Discrimination
• difficult to demonstrate at the individual level– women tend to acknowledge having
been discriminated against as a group, but few report being personally being discriminated against
(Crosby, 1981)
Discrimination
• normally assessed at the aggregate level– Florida homicide cases 1976-77– rate of first degree murder
prosecution based on the race of the victim and defendant
(Radelet, 1981)
Discrimination
• normally assessed at the aggregate level– AA defendant/White victim
90%– White defendant/White victim
50%– White defendant/AA victim
50%– AA defendant/AA victim
40%(Radelet, 1981)
Discrimination
• normally assessed at the aggregate level– White man $11, 362– African American man $11, 783– White woman $11, 504– African American woman$12, 237
(Ayres, 1991)