Groups, Prejudice, & Stereotyping PDF

Groups, Prejudice, & Stereotyping Social Neuroscience Professor Jon Freeman Columbia University Homunculus Homunculus Thinking about the Self Kelley et al. (2002): Making trait judgments about oneself relative to a known other (George W. Bush) activates medial PFC Moran et al. (2006): Self-related a...

Groups, Prejudice, & Stereotyping Social Neuroscience Professor Jon Freeman Columbia University Homunculus Homunculus Thinking about the Self Kelley et al. (2002): Making trait judgments about oneself relative to a known other (George W. Bush) activates medial PFC Moran et al. (2006): Self-related activity for both positive and negative traits Mitchell et al. (2005): Medial PFC also activated when making trait judgments about people judged to be similar to us Thinking about the Self mPFC activated by – Hearing one’s own name – Arbitrary associations to self, for instance during attention tasks (geometric shapes) and memory tasks (word associations) – Attending to one’s own emotional response relative to that of a person in a photo Dividing up the ‘self’ ‘The Self’: Sense of Embodiment A sense in which our self is located within the space occupied by our own bodies Disrupted in out-of-body experiences and bodily illusions – rTPJ lesions – Virtual reality in healthy subjects (e.g., Lenggenhager et al., 2007) Dividing up the ‘self’ ‘The Self’: Memory People tend to remember the past in terms of their current knowledge and beliefs. – Marcus (1986) measured current political attitudes in 1973 and 1982. In 1982, they were asked to recall previous attitudes. Latter skewed towards current beliefs. Tendency to remember the past in a self-enhancing manner – Those who identify strongly with an in-group are worse at remembering acts of historical violence by their in-group (Sahdra & Ross, 2007). – Self-enhancing memories are judged to feel more recent than (matched) memories that reflect badly on oneself (Ross & Wilson, 2002) Dividing up the ‘self’ Groups Matter Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment – Two arbitrary groups created (prisoners and guards) – Different behavior emerged and a them–us mentality developed – Experiment terminated early What is a Group? Johnson and Johnson (1987) 1. A collection of individuals who are interacting with one another 2. A social unit consisting of two or more persons who perceive themselves as belonging to a group 3. A collection of individuals who are interdependent 4. A collection of individuals who join together to achieve a goal 5. A collection of individuals who are trying to satisfy some need through their joint association 6. A collection of individuals whose interactions are structured by a set of roles and norms 7. A collection of individuals who influence each other Studying Groups Social neuroscience methods hard to use with a group of individuals However, it is possible to compare individuals’ acting/thinking in terms of group memberships (White, American, male) versus situations in which group membership is not salient Also possible to compare differences across groups (i.e., cross-cultural) Social Identity and Groups Social identity = a collection of different group memberships (e.g., nationality, race, religion, political allegiances) Inter-group biases vary as a function of the perspective from which the groups are judged – Asian women view their math ability more favorably when ethnic identity is highlighted, relative to when gender is highlighted (Shih, Pittinsky, & Ambady, 1999) Priming ethnic identity increases math performance; priming gender identity decreases it (Ambady et al., 2002) – White women show evidence of a more negative attitude towards Black women when race is highlighted than when gender is highlighted (Mitchell, Nosek, & Banaji, 2003) Categorization ¨ cognitive short-cuts ¨ efficiency ¨ lead to adaptive behavior Social categories The Big Three: – gender, race, age – “master status” categories – automatic and obligatory – spontaneously trigger stereotypes, attitudes, and behavioral tendencies Groups and Categories Stereotyping = perceiving members of a given category as possessing various common attributes An efficient way of organizing and storing info about people in long-term memory But source of bias and generalization Accuracy is a separate (and extremely controversial) issue Stereotyping holds coffee to be grabbed mug caring emotional female Freeman & Ambady (2011) Stereotyping caring aggressive Freeman & Ambady (2009) Stereotypes impact visual perceptions White or Black? Freeman et al., 2011 Stereotypes impact visual perceptions Freeman et al. (2011) Out-Groups and Prejudice Prejudice = negative attitudes, emotions, or behaviors to members of a group on the basis of their membership of that group (Brown, 1995) – Explicit measures (problem of social desirability bias) Questionnaires (Modern Racism Scale) – Implicit measures (problem of measurement validity) EMG – more frowns when Whites interact with Blacks, despite rating them favorably (Vanman et al., 1997) IAT test (Implicit Association Test) Stereotyping and Prejudice Both can be either EXPLICIT or IMPLICIT Stereotyping is ‘cognitive’ (semantic associations) and prejudice is ‘emotional’ (affective associations) Stereotyping and Prejudice Prejudice “emotional” Stereotyping “cognitive” Amodio, 2014 The Implicit Association Test (IAT) IAT Black Bad White Good awful [left key] IAT Black Bad White Good [right key] IAT Black Bad White Good beautiful [right key] IAT Black Bad White Good [left key] IAT SWITCH IAT White Bad Black Good awful [left key] IAT White Bad Black Good [left key] IAT White Bad Black Good beautiful [right key] IAT White Bad Black Good [right key] The IAT Used not only for race, but for other groups such as nationality, politics, gender, etc. Weak correlation with self-report measures (r = ~.2) Is it sensitive to long-term attitudes or current task demands? – (e.g., IAT pro-White/anti-Black bias effect reduced after priming with well-liked Black people; Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001) Better predictor of some social behavior, but recently being questioned – Correlates with implicit behavior (nonverbal hostility) but not explicit behavior (verbal statements) (Dovidio et al.) The IAT The divide EXPLICIT BIAS IMPLICIT BIAS Dunham et al. (2008) fMRI ofCross-Cultural Prejudice Self Concepts Phelps et al. (2001) fMRI of Prejudice Phelps et al. (2000) – White participants – Amygdala activity when viewing black faces correlates with IAT measure (outside scanner) not explicit measure Cunningham et al. (2004) 30 ms 525 ms Cunningham et al. (2004), Psychological Science Cross-Cultural Self Concepts Lieberman et al. (2005) Role of motivation Minimal/novel group paradigms Role of motivation Van Bavel et al. (2008) Role of motivation Van Bavel et al. (2008) Greater amygdala activation to novel ingroup members (NOT novel out-group members) No difference in activation based on race Amygdala Activity in Prejudice Studies? What does it all mean? – Phelps et al. (2000) Amygdala activity not found for well-liked Black faces (so not out-group per se) – Amodio et al. (2003) Startle response greater for Black faces than Asian or White faces (so not out-group per se) – Cunningham et al. (2004) Enhanced amygdala activation to racial out-group vs. in-group faces but only at short exposures – Lieberman et al. (2005) Found increased amygdala activity when Blacks view Black faces (violent stereotype rather than prejudice?) – Van Bavel et al. (2008) Stronger amygdala activation to novel in-group rather than out-group members; no different based on race à Amygdala activity does not reflect an ‘out-group neural signature’ but a complex evaluation that takes into account familiarity with particular members of the outgroup, socio-cultural stereotypes, and motivation relevance Bias as reduced mentalizing Bias as reduced mentalizing A lack of mPFC activation to low–low (eliciting Disgust) group (addicts, homeless) – a dehumanized response to extreme “lowest of the low” outgroups? (Harris & Fiske, 2006) Disgust: Control of Prejudice Knowing about stereotypes and prejudices but not acting upon them may require greater self-control Also, external versus internal motivations – ‘I attempt to act in non-prejudiced ways towards Black people because it is personally important to me.’ (internal) – ‘I attempt to appear non-prejudiced towards Black people in order to avoid disapproval from others.’ (external) Those reporting only internal motivations have lower IAT (Devine et al., 2002) and lower startle eye-blink response to Black faces (Amodio et al., 2003) Kubota et al. (2012) What can we do? Lai et al. (2016) In-Group/Out-Group Summary In terms of cognitive and neural mechanisms, there isn’t a simple division in terms of ‘in’ and ‘out’, but a more complex process involving: – – – – – Culturally-learned stereotypes Knowledge of individuals Emotional responsiveness Individual motivations Attempts to control negative evaluations Stereotyping (‘cognitive’) and prejudice (‘emotional’) rely on dissociable mechanisms Social groups/categories Sex Race Age Ethnicity Sexual orientation University affiliations Fraternity-sorority affiliations Novel groups Categories à Stereotypes “men are aggressive” “women are good helpers” Feed-Forward Approach behavior stereotypes attitudes goals social categories facial feature space Freeman & Johnson (2016); Freeman & Ambady (2011) Dynamic Interactive (DI) Model behavior stereotypes attitudes goals social categories facial feature space Freeman & Johnson (2016); Freeman & Ambady (2011) Categories à Stereotypes heavy brow – male – aggressive Traditional Feed-Forward View ? Prepare to read the words that briefly appear in the box below. Here is what you saw: Top-down vs. Bottom-up bottom-up processes rely on the stimulus The letter between C and T looks like a cross between A or H. top-down processes rely on expectations (which depend on knowledge) The letter between C and T cannot be an H. Top-down vs. Bottom-up An excerpt from a magazine ad: L ke y ur b ain, the n w L nd Rov r autom tic ly adj sts to anyth ng. Who is standing behind Bill Clinton? Recurrent feedback Dehaene et al., 2006 Freeman & Ambady (2011) “SOCIAL” top-down person knowledge social context stereotypes goals/motivations emotions “SENSORY” bottom-up facial cues vocal cues bodily cues Dynamic Interactive (DI) Model behavior stereotypes attitudes goals social categories facial feature space Freeman & Johnson (2016); Freeman & Ambady (2011) Dynamic Interactive (DI) Model aggressive timid male female Black White Asian larger jaw round face darker skin lighter skin thinner eyes excitatory inhibitory Freeman & Johnson (2016); Freeman & Ambady (2011) Stereotype influences on race perception White or Black? Freeman et al. (2011), PLoS ONE Brooks & Freeman (2018) Brooks & Freeman (2018) Brooks & Freeman (2018) Brooks & Freeman (2018) Choose the face that looks more ANGRY Brooks & Freeman (2018) Choose the face that looks more ANGRY Brooks & Freeman (2018) Choose the face that looks more ANGRY Brooks & Freeman (2018) Choose the face that looks more ANGRY Brooks & Freeman (2018) “Anger” classification image (CI) Brooks & Freeman (2018) Stereotype influences on race perception Dotsch et al., 2008 High-prejudice perceivers had internal visual representations of Moroccans as more untrustworthy and criminal The many faces of “context” Freeman et al. (2011); Hehman et al. (2015); Hugenberg & Bodenhausen (2004) Freeman & Johnson (2016) Neural network of flexible social perception Freeman & Johnson (2016) Dynamic Interactive (DI) Model aggressive timid male female Black White Asian larger jaw round face darker skin lighter skin thinner eyes Freeman & Johnson (2016); Freeman & Ambady (2011) How are social categories represented? Freeman et al. (2008), JEP:G; Freeman et al. (2010), JESP; Freeman (2014), PBR Mouse-tracking WHITE BLACK AUC PARALLEL ATTRACTION MD Freeman & Ambady (2010) How are social categories represented? Stolier & Freeman (2017) How are social categories represented? typical atypical typical atypical Stolier & Freeman (2017) How are social categories represented? Sex Race Stolier & Freeman (2017) How are social categories represented? atypical male trials: ‘female’ category pattern (typical female trials average) Stolier & Freeman (2017) Dynamic Interactive (DI) Model aggressive timid male female Black White Asian larger jaw round face darker skin lighter skin thinner eyes Freeman & Johnson (2016); Freeman & Ambady (2011) Automatic stereotype activation shy timid quiet reserved conformist passive rule-obsessed obedient intelligent smart brainy scientific traditional conventional custom-following family-oriented active strong athletic muscular unintelligent dumb uneducated ignorant social outgoing extroverted talkative hostile hotheaded threatening aggressive Stolier & Freeman (in prep) Automatic stereotype activation Asian stereotypes shy traditional timid conventional quiet custom-following reserved family-oriented conformist intelligent passive smart rule-obsessed brainy obedient scientific Black stereotypes active strong athletic muscular unintelligent dumb uneducated ignorant hostile hotheaded threatening aggressive social outgoing extroverted talkative Stolier & Freeman (in prep) race io t o em sex n Stereotypes affect visual perception aggressive unintelligent poor loud athletic violent apathetic strong hypersexual high spatial abilities criminals Black promiscuous large Male Freeman & Ambady (2011); Johnson, Freeman, & Pauker (2012) Stereotypes affect visual perception hysterical intelligent moody patient high math abilities collective bad drivers asexual sensitive low math abilities passive Asian demure small Female Freeman & Ambady (2011); Johnson, Freeman, & Pauker (2012) Dynamic Interactive (DI) Model aggressive timid male female Black White Asian larger jaw round face darker skin lighter skin thinner eyes Freeman & Johnson (2016), TiCS; Freeman & Ambady, 2011, Psych. Review Dynamic Interactive (DI) Model aggressive timid male female Black White Asian larger jaw round face darker skin lighter skin thinner eyes Freeman & Johnson (2016), TiCS; Freeman & Ambady, 2011, Psych. Review Stereotypes affect visual perception sex × race (e.g., Johnson, Freeman, & Pauker, 2012; Stroessner, 1996) rac e – Black—male – Asian—female sex × emotion (e.g., Hess, Adams, & Kleck, 2004; Becker et al., 2007) em sex n otio – male—angry – female—happy race × emotion (e.g., Hugenberg & Bodenhausen, 2003, 2004; Kang & Chasteen, 2009) – Black—angry Sex-race interactions more efficient more efficient Johnson, Freeman, & Pauker (2012) Emotion and gender Becker et al. (2007) Stereotypes affect visual perception Stolier & Freeman (2016), Nature Neuroscience Stereotypes affect visual perception MALE FEMALE BLACK—MALE high similarity BLACK—FEMALE low similarity Stolier & Freeman (2016), Nature Neuroscience Stereotypes affect visual perception Mouse-tracking biases in perception similarity structure MDS solution Stolier & Freeman (2016), Nature Neuroscience Stereotypes affect visual perception Conceptual biases in stereotype knowledge “To what extent does the typical American believe Asian people are…” (96 traits) intelligent sociable hostile athletic shy friendly timid aggressive Stolier & Freeman (2016), Nature Neuroscience Stereotypes affect visual perception conceptual knowledge Black concept Angry concept social perception neural representation Black faces Angry faces ≈ Freeman & Johnson (2016), TiCS Stereotypes affect visual perception Stolier & Freeman (2016), Nature Neuroscience Stereotypes affect visual perception bottom-up visual similarity HMAX-C2 faces matched on low-level visual properties statistically controlled for bottom-up visual similarity computational model of ventral-visual representation (HMAX-C2) pixel-intensity maps image silhouettes pixel-intensity image silhouette Stolier & Freeman (2016), Nature Neuroscience Stereotypes affect visual perception Weapon identification task Payne (2001); Payne (2006); Correll et al. (2002); Correll et al. (2015); Amodio (2014) Dynamic Interactive (DI) Model crime gun tool Black White pistol handle darker skin lighter skin Freeman & Johnson (2016), TiCS; Freeman & Ambady, 2011, Psych. Review Dynamic Interactive (DI) Model crime gun tool Black White pistol handle darker skin lighter skin Freeman & Johnson (2016), TiCS; Freeman & Ambady, 2011, Psych. Review Stereotypes affect visual perception + + OR OR 1800 ms 1000 ms 200 ms 1000 ms Oh, Vartiainen, & Freeman (in prep) Stereotypes affect visual perception + + Oh, Vartiainen, & Freeman (in prep) Stereotypes affect visual perception RT delay (ms) for Black-primed tools gun tool neural-pattern similarity object-sensitive cortex (including FG) gun tool Black-primed tools neural similarity to gun Oh, Vartiainen, & Freeman (in prep) Neural network of flexible social perception Freeman & Johnson (2016), TICS