PSY220 Lecture 11 PDF

Stereotyping, Prejudice, and Discrimination Key Terms: Stereotyping: Beliefs about members of a group (cognitive). Prejudice: Negative feelings toward a group (affective). Discrimination: Negative behavior toward group members (behavioral). Disadvantages of Group Living...

Stereotyping, Prejudice, and Discrimination Key Terms: Stereotyping: Beliefs about members of a group (cognitive). Prejudice: Negative feelings toward a group (affective). Discrimination: Negative behavior toward group members (behavioral). Disadvantages of Group Living Intergroup competition and status differentials emerge Dominant and dominated groups emerge o Race o Socioeconomic status Intergroup bias o Stereotyping o Prejudice o Discrimination Competing for resources leads to social hierarchies Group Membership In-Group: Group we belong to. Out-Group: Group we do not belong to. Biases: In-Group Favoritism: Positive treatment toward in-group members. Out-Group Derogation: Negative views and treatment of out-group members. Stereotypes Definition: Beliefs that certain traits apply to group members. Stereotype Content Model: Groups are evaluated based on warmth and competence.  Nature of stereotypes vary systematically depending on how the group is evaluated on the dimensions of warmth and competence Ambivalent Stereotypes: Example: Older adults may be viewed as warm but not competent. Benevolent Sexism: Positive-sounding stereotypes that reinforce inequality (e.g., “Women should be protected”). Prejudice Definition: A negative attitude or affectively charged view towards a group and its members Measuring Implicit Prejudice: Implicit Association Test (IAT): Tests unconscious biases by measuring reaction times. o Assess the strength of associations between concepts by measuring response latencies Findings: o 2/3 of White people and 1/2 of Black people show strong or moderate prejudice toward Black people. o Criticism: how much these scores predict meaningful behavior (predictive validity) is controversial. o This test is only important if it can predict subtle forms of discrimination, and it hasn’t always done a good job of that Discrimination Definition: Unfair treatment to individuals based on their membership in a group Explicit & Implicit Discrimination: In modern society, it is not socially acceptable to express prejudice Creates conflict between what people really think and what they express to others Modern Racism Rejection of explicitly racist beliefs while maintaining an enduring suspicion and animosity toward a group Job Application Study: White participants admitted fewer Black applicants than White applicants, even with similar qualifications. Origins of Out-Group Dislike 1. Economic Perspective Realistic Group Conflict Theory: Prejudice stems from different social groups competing over scarce resources. Robber’s Cave Study: Boys at a summer camp split into competing groups showed hostility, reduced only through cooperation on shared goals. 2. Motivational Perspective There are psychological reasons (underlying motivation) for we have intergroup conflict Need to belong Minimal Group Paradigm: An experimental paradigm in which researchers create groups based on arbitrary and meaningless criteria and then examine how members of these minimal groups are inclined to behave towards one another Even arbitrary group assignments trigger in-group favoritism. Example: "Klee group" vs. "Kandinsky group" study. Social Identity Theory: People derive part of their self-concept from membership in groups People motivated to view in-group more favorably than the out-group, because it boosts self-esteem Example: People rated out-group members lower after receiving negative personal feedback. 3. Cognitive Perspective Cognitive Shortcuts: Stereotyping comes from a cognitive process that we use to make categories Stereotypes are shortcuts Stereotypes can be more automatic (not controlled) Stereotypes conserves cognitive resources, but what is gained as efficiency is paid for by inaccuracy Out-Group Homogeneity Effect: Believing out-group members are more similar than in-group members. Paired Distinctiveness: The pairing of 2 distinctive events because they occur together (e.g., crime and minority status). Shooter Bias: People are more likely to mistakenly shoot unarmed Black targets in simulations. Biased Information Processing: Resume Whitening – Deleting telltale signs of race or ethnicity from a CV 40% of racial minorities alter resumes to seem more culturally "neutral," increasing callbacks. Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: Have an expectation about what another person is like Influences how we act toward that person Causes person to behave consistently with our original expectation Stereotypes influence behavior in ways that confirm expectations. Study: Interviewers behaved differently toward Black and White candidates, affecting candidates' performance. Consequences for Social Interactions We don’t often interact with members of these groups We don’t want to “step in it” or make a mistake We know the negative views people can hold about our groups and us Reducing Stereotyping, Prejudice, & Discrimination 1. Self-Affirmation: a. Strengthening personal identity reduces defensive reactions. 2. Mutual Interdependence & Common Goals: a. Cooperation reduces prejudice (as shown in Robber’s Cave Study Part 2). 3. Contact (Key Conditions): a. Equal status b. Common goals c. Intergroup cooperation d. Authority support e. Friendships across groups Consequences for Individuals Systemic Inequalities: Underrepresentation (racial bias in pain assessment, treatment disparity), Food deserts, Educational gaps, and Unequal sentencing. Psychological Impact: Attributional ambiguity makes it hard for minority members to interpret whether treatment is due to discrimination. 1. Job Application Study Method: Researchers submitted identical job applications for Black and White applicants, varying qualifications from excellent to poor. Employers evaluated the applicants based on resumes alone. Result: High Qualifications: Both Black and White applicants were admitted equally. Moderate/Unclear Qualifications: White applicants were more likely to be admitted. Implication: Modern Racism in Hiring: Subtle prejudice occurs when decisions are ambiguous, reflecting implicit biases in hiring practices. 2. Robber’s Cave Study Method: Boys were divided into two groups at a summer camp (Eagles vs. Rattlers). They engaged in competitive games, fostering rivalry. Result: Hostility and conflict escalated through competition. In-group favoritism and out-group hostility emerged. Implication: Realistic Group Conflict Theory: Competition for limited resources leads to prejudice and intergroup conflict. 3. Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Study Method: White interviewers conducted mock interviews with Black and White candidates. Interviewers were trained to mimic behaviors they previously used with Black candidates. Result: Candidates interviewed under less favorable conditions performed worse. Implication: Self-Fulfilling Prophecy in Stereotyping: Expectations based on stereotypes influence behavior, creating a cycle of reinforcement. 4. Robber’s Cave Study (Part 2) Method:  After initial hostility, researchers introduced cooperative tasks requiring both groups to work together toward a shared goal (e.g., fixing a water supply). Result: Intergroup conflict decreased. Positive relationships developed as groups cooperated. Implication: Contact Hypothesis: Cooperation toward superordinate goals reduces prejudice and promotes positive intergroup relations. 5. Minimal Group Paradigm Method: Participants were randomly assigned to groups based on trivial criteria (e.g., art preference: "Klee" vs. "Kandinsky"). They allocated rewards to in-group and out-group members. Result: Participants favored their own group, maximizing differences even when groups were arbitrary. Implication: Social Identity Theory: In-group favoritism emerges even without meaningful group distinctions, driven by a need for positive social identity. 6. Derogating Out-Groups Study Method: Participants received either positive or negative personal feedback. They then rated job candidates who were either Jewish or non-Jewish. Result:  Participants who received negative feedback rated Jewish candidates more harshly. Their self-esteem improved after derogating the out-group. Implication: Social Identity and Self-Esteem: People may put down out-groups to restore self- worth, illustrating prejudice’s psychological function.