Psychology of Stereotyping and Prejudice PDF

Psychology of Stereotyping and Prejudice PSYCH 25950 Prof. Alysson Light Coming to my office? Please wear a mask! Tamir Rice Henry Berg-Brousseau Nex Benedict What role did prejudice play? Who studies prejudice? +History +Psychology is just one of +Literature...

Psychology of Stereotyping and Prejudice PSYCH 25950 Prof. Alysson Light Coming to my office? Please wear a mask! Tamir Rice Henry Berg-Brousseau Nex Benedict What role did prejudice play? Who studies prejudice? +History +Psychology is just one of +Literature many disciplinary approaches to this +Philosophy important topic. +Sociology +We feed off of (and +Anthropology contribute to) ideas from +Law other disciplines. +Etc. Levels of Analysis Structura Psychology’s focus is l here… Institutional But this is changing Interpersonal some (see Week 8) Individual/ Internalize d And levels interact Psychological Approach +Empirical +Generally quantitative (some exceptions) +Individual/interpersonal unit of analysis +Focus on cause and effect +Focus on mechanism and social cognitive processes +Presumption of “universals” Course Structure +Lecture/Large Group on Mondays and Wednesdays +Discussion section on Fridays +Section 1: Beecher 101, Roman Gallardo +Section 2: Rosenwald 432, Abby Schwartz Readings +Textbook chapters +Generally read prior to Friday +Library eBook allows one reader at a time +But you can download up to 60 pages… +If you’re using it, please close/”return” it when you’re done! +Additional articles +Posted on Canvas and linked in the syllabus +Read prior to Discussion on Friday, come prepared to talk about them Grade Components +Reflection Papers + 4 total, due alternating Fridays +Quizzes 4 total +Midterm paper + 3-5 pages double-spaced, no reading other than course material required +Final paper + Literature review, 5 pages double-spaced +Participation + Active engagement in Discussion/Large group required to earn full points + (Yes, that means talking!) Topis by Week +Week 2: Social Categorization and Stereotypes +Week 3: Stereotype Activation and Application +Week 4: “Old Fashioned” vs. “Contemporary” Racism, Individual Differences in Prejudice +Week 5: Being the Target of Discrimination +Week 6: Gender, Sexual Orientation, and Gender Identity +Week 7: Age, Ability, and Appearance +Week 8: Sociohistorical Context and Structural Approaches +Week 9: Developmental Perspectives and Reducing Prejudice  These are anonymous today! Poll Everywhere PollEv.com/proflight Psychology Building Blocks +Affect (i.e. feelings) +Valence: Positivity or Negativity +Behavior +Outwardly visible actions +Cognition +Thoughts– both conscious and non-conscious Terms +Prejudice: + Negative attitudes or negative feelings towards Affect members of a social group +Discrimination: + Unfairly treating individuals because of their Bia Behavior membership in particular groups s +Stereotyping: + Assuming that individual members of that group Cognition possess characteristics associated with that group + Applying psychological characteristics indiscriminately to all members of the group What is Prejudice? “Thinking ill of others without sufficient warrant.” (Allport, 1954, p. 6) “A preconceived negative judgment of a group and its individual members.” (Myers, 2008, p. 302) “Ethnic prejudice is an antipathy based upon a faulty and inflexible generalization. It may be felt or expressed. It may be directed toward a group as a whole, or toward an individual because he is a member of that group.” Prejudgment Component “Thinking ill of others without sufficient warrant.” (Allport, 1954, p. 6) “A preconceived negative judgment of a group and its individual members.” (Myers, 2008, p. 302) “Ethnic prejudice is an antipathy based upon a faulty and inflexible generalization. It may be felt or expressed. It may be directed toward a group as a whole, or toward an individual because he is a member of that group.” Valence Component “Thinking ill of others without sufficient warrant.” (Allport, 1954, p. 6) “A preconceived negative judgment of a group and its individual members.” (Myers, 2008, p. 302) “Ethnic prejudice is an antipathy based upon a faulty and inflexible generalization. It may be felt or expressed. It may be directed toward a group as a whole, or toward an individual because he is a member of that group.” Cottrell & Neuberg (2005) argue that there are different “flavors” of prejudice that motivate specific emotion profiles (anger, resentment, disgust, fear, envy) Stigma Stigma – Culturally-shared negativity toward a group (versus personal beliefs) Generally associated with ostracism or avoidance Visible – Physical deformity, race, gender Personal Traits – Mental competencies, sexuality, imprisonment history, substance use Group (“Tribal”) Stigma – Based on group affiliations  What is a Stereotype? An oversimplified picture of the world, that satisfies a need to see the world as more understandable and manageable than it really is. (Lippmann, 1922) A belief about the personal attributes of a group of people. Stereotypes are sometimes overgeneralized, inaccurate, and resistant to new information.” (Myers, 2008, p. 302) Beliefs about individuals that are based strictly on that individual’s group memberships. Typically negative in valence.  What is a discrimination? “Unjustifiable negative behavior toward a group or its members.” (Myers, 2008, p. 303) Failure to treat people equitably as a consequence of their group membership. Legal Definition of Discrimination Discrimination refers to the treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit. Discrimination can be the effect of some law or established practice that confers privileges on a certain class or denies privileges to a certain class because of race, age, sex, nationality, religion, or handicap. Federal law, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, prohibits employment discrimination based on any one of those characteristics. Other federal statutes, supplemented by court decisions, prohibit discrimination in voting rights, housing, credit extension, public education, and access to public facilities. State laws also provide further protection against discrimination. Who are the Targets of Bias? +By psychology’s definitions, anyone who is part of a social group, or has characteristics that evoke “prejudgment”. +Legal definitions specify particular social groups that receive protection +Gender, Race/Ethnicity, Religion, etc. +Psychological literature is rather US-centric… +Some important kinds of bias (e.g. casteism) are understudied Primary Categories +People first notice another +But these categories are person’s importantly linked to other + Race dimensions that evoke bias + Gender +Social class + Age +Occupation +Much research on the +Disability psychology of bias focuses +…and identities intersect on these categories to lead to unique outcomes for people with different “combinations” of identities Race, Gender, Age +Where do these categories come from? Race +Race is a system for classifying human beings +It is grounded in the belief that people embody inherited and fixed biological characteristics that identify them +Race is a social category, not a biological one +Analysis of human genetic similarities/differences does not map onto any conception of racial categories (Long & Kittles, 2009) Race and Society +“Race” was not used in English to refer to groups of people until the 1600s +When racial segregation was legal in the U.S., race was defined by law and people could petition a court to change their racial classification +Racial categories– both legally and socially- change across time and across location Gender +Distinction between gender and sex +Ways of delineating gender vary across cultures +Traits, behaviors, and careers associated with gender have changed over time Age +Age should be pretty consistent, right? +Life stages differ across cultures +e.g. adolescence, emerging adulthood +At what age should people enter the workforce? +At what age should people leave the workforce?  Trawalter & Richeson, 2008 +Had White and Black participants have a discussion in the lab with another participant +IV1: Participant Race +IV2: Discussion partner’s race: Same-race or Interracial dyad +IV3: Discussion topic (manipulated within dyad): Related to race or not + College drinking policy + College administration’s attempts to diversify student population + Campus fraternities +DV: Took video of interactions and coded anxious behavior during each discussion topic Trawalter & Richeson, 2008 Interracial Dyad 5.5 5 4.5 Anxious Behavior 4 3.5 3 Race-Neutral Trawalter & Richeson, 2008 Interracial Dyad 5.5 5 4.5 Anxious Behavior 4 3.5 3 Race-Neutral Race-Related Why Does Talking About Prejudice Make Some People Anxious? +Concerns about appearing prejudiced +A lack of experience +A sense of ambiguity about how to behave Acknowledging Social Categories ≠ Bias +Fear that knowledge of stereotypes leads to prejudice +“Colorblind” ideologies +(we’ll discuss in Week 9!) +Knowledge of the content of stereotypes is unrelated to individual differences in prejudice (Devine 1989) +People low in prejudice are just as aware of negative stereotypes of groups as people high in prejudice My perspective +We live with the societal consequences of prejudice and systems of inequality +Naming and acknowledging unequal systems and beliefs that support them helps us to make the correct attribution +In this class, we will talk about race and racism, gender and sexism, sexual orientation and homophobia, as well as fatphobia, ableism, and ageism. +Some of what we will discuss is dark and troubling +Sometimes it may change how we view our own actions, or the environments we’ve lived in +I think you are all here because you believe that knowledge on this topics can be enlightening, empowering, and necessary for creating change in ourselves and our worlds. How Do We Know? Stereotyping and Prejudice, 3/20/24 46 Was that racist? Was that sexist? Is that transphobic? 47 Three Questions Might Be Asked +Was this thing caused by +Does this thing result in prejudicial or stereotyping negative, disparate beliefs about members of outcomes for members of a group? different groups? +Does this thing enhance or reduce existing These are all inequality between questions groups? about cause and effect 48 Does this enhance/maintain or reduce existing inequality? +Example: Native American mascots +What is the existing hierarchy? +Historical oppression, genocide, forced assimilation and dispossession of Native Americans in the US/Canada, contemporary disrespect for tribal sovereignty, lack of investment in issues faced by Native Americans, existence of anti-Native prejudice and stereotyping +Question: Do Native American mascots enhance or reduce this inequality? 49  No! We can address this Matter of Opinion? with psychological science! Attenuate? “Mascots “Mascots honor reinforce Native harmful Americans! stereotypes ” !” Reinforce? 50 +Research Question: What effect does exposure to Native American mascots have on the well-being of Native Americans? +To answer, we want to know what well-being looks like with and without exposure Variable A concept/construct that +Then we compare those two groups varies in a study (has at +Two variables in this question: least two levels, maybe many more) + Exposure to Native American mascots + Native Americans’ Well-being Q: Is race/ethnicity a variable here? From Davis-Delano, Gone, & Fryberg, 2020 51  Two different Operational Definition operational definitions for How a concept is measured exposure to Native or manipulated as a variable in a study American mascots +We could ask people about frequency of exposure to Native American Mascots and see if that is associated with self-esteem +Or we could compare self-esteem of Native American students at unis with and without NA Mascots Q: What’s 15 5 wrong with Self-Esteem 4 Self-Esteem 10 Note: Not real 5 3 these two 2 studies! 0 1 studies? 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 Frequency of Exposure Uni w/ NA Uni w/o NA Mascot Mascot 52 +Does exposure to Native American mascots harm Native American’s self-esteem? These studies would have alternative explanations that are not ruled out. +Both studies are correlational designs Correlational Design Study in which all variables of interest are measured (i.e. observed), and none are manipulated 53  Example: Positive Correlation Y # of Deaths (drownings) = Major City X # of Ice Cream Cones Eaten  Three Possible Explanations Correlational designs can’t Directionality rule any of Problem these out …and we conclude cause-and- 3rd Variable effect by Problem ruling out everything else How do we establish cause and effect? +We conduct experiments that use random assignment to rule out alternative explanations Experiment Random Assignment A study in which one Using a randomization procedure (e.g. variable is manipulated dice, digit randomizer, etc.) to assign (changed) by the participants to experimental conditions researchers to observe (i.e. levels of the manipulated variable), differences in outcomes or the order in which conditions occur depending on the level (for within-subjects designs). This (also known as a results in groups that should not differ Randomized Controlled systematically from one another Trial, or RCT) 56 Do Native American Mascots Cause Native American Students to Feel Worse? Independent Variable +Randomly assigned participants to one of k A variable that is levels of the independent variable: manipulated in an experiment. This is the + Images of Native American mascots (e.g. Chief Wahoo) variable that is and text stating that many Americans know little about hypothesized to be the Native Americans beyond these images “cause” in the cause-and- Dependent Variable effect relationship. + Images of Disney’s Pocahontas/similar text A variable that is measured + Description of stereotypically negative outcomes for after the manipulation in an experiment. This is the Native Americans (alcoholism/high school dropouts, etc.) variable hypothesized to be + Control (no prime) the “effect” in the cause- and-effect relationship. +Afterwards, measured self-esteem as the dependent variable Fryberg et al., 2008 57  +Lower self-esteem reported after Native American adolescents viewed stereotypical images like Chief Wahoo +Could participants have differed in self-esteem before the manipulation? Graphs usually show +Yes, but because of random means (averages) for a assignment, it is unlikely condition, rather than individual’s scores that the groups differed on average. Fryberg et al., 2008 58 Disparate Impacts +Thing has worse outcomes for some groups than others +Thing does not need to be caused by prejudice +Often the thing of interest is not under researchers’ control +Cannot conduct an experiment +Conduct longitudinal studies to look at how policy/event changes outcomes for groups over time 59 Disparate Impacts of COVID-19 by Gender Collins et Lee et al., 60 al., 2020 Did Prejudice Cause This? Prejudice Outcome 61 Did Prejudice Cause This? +Q: How do we test for cause and effect? +Experiments +How do we manipulate prejudice? +Experimentally manipulate target’s social identity 62 Measuring Discrimination +Hiring Practices But are there alternative (Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2003) explanations? +Applicants randomly assigned White names (Emily, Greg) received one callback for every 10 resumes sent +Those given Black names (Lakisha, Jamal) received one callback for every 15 sent Lakisha and Jamal may also be perceived as less wealthy than Emily and Greg. Did Prejudice Cause This? +To attribute behavior to prejudice, we often focus on correlation +Yes, boo hiss! Bad Scientists! +Correlation is a necessary but not sufficient condition for causation +Goal is to rule out third variables, but we need to acknowledge they remain. 64 Process of Elimination +Example: Opposition to trans-inclusive policies +Motivated by prejudice towards transgender people? Or desire to protect women? +Morgenroth, Axt, and Westgate (2024) measured support/opposition to trans-inclusive policies, and competing predictors: +Implicit/Explicit prejudice towards transgender people +Beliefs about men being dangerous and importance of protecting women +Which predict opposition to trans-inclusive policies? 65  Correlation p-value Generally, no Statistic that evaluates the Statistic indicating the correlation = no association between two variables. probability of attaining causation Varies from -1 to 1. Higher absolute results if there were no true (But remember value indicates a stronger association between correlation is not relationship. Sign indicates variables. Smaller p-values sufficient!) direction of relationship (positive or = greater statistical 66 negative) significance. Did Prejudice Cause This? +But can we manipulate prejudice? +Some work manipulates perceptions of groups through evaluative conditioning (think: Classical/Pavlovian conditioning +Generally focuses on made-up groups (immigrants from Greeble!) +As we’ll see, effective interventions to change prejudice are rare and usually studied as such +But let’s see an exception 67 Manipulating Prejudice +Morgenroth, Axt, and Westgate Support for Trans-Inclusive (2024) recruited participants Policies After Manipulation opposed to trans-inclusive 3.4 policies 3.3 3.2 +Manipulated imagined positive 3.1 contact 3 + Ps imagined having a positive 2.9 interaction with a trans woman at a 2.8 friend’s birthday party + Compared to imagining an 2.7 Trans Gentle Man Control interaction with a peaceful, gentle Woman man, or simply to imagine the birthday party (control) 68 Did Prejudice Cause This? +Manipulating prejudice changed support for the policy +Since Ps were randomly assigned to condition, there is no explanation besides “the condition changed support” +i.e. Prejudice had a causal impact on support for the policy 69 Did Prejudice Cause This? +All these methods answer the question for the aggregate (group) level +Inferential statistics (i.e. involving p-values require multiple observations +We really can’t do that for individual people or actions +Was this individual behavior caused by prejudice? Psychology can’t definitively tell us. +Attributional Ambiguity 70 Research Methods +Foundational for understanding content of this course +Ch. 2 of the textbook +New to psychology? Need a review? +Check the Modules on Canvas– I have accessible resources just for you! +Check these out by Discussion on Friday -Read Kite et al. text Ch. 1- 2 -Methods Module on Canvas -Discussion! For Friday