STEREOTYPES PREJUDICE & DISCRIMINATION (Psych 201 - Chapter 11 - Spring 2014)

2,514 views
2,185 views

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
5 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,514
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
116
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
84
Comments
0
Likes
5
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

STEREOTYPES PREJUDICE & DISCRIMINATION (Psych 201 - Chapter 11 - Spring 2014)

  1. 1. This Week’s Playlist Artist Song / Psych Concept 1. Randy Newman Short People (Explicit Prejudice) 2. Madonna What It Feels Like For A Girl (Hostile Sexism) 3. Bob Dylan Just Like A Woman (Benevolent Sexism) 4. Chamillionaire Ridin’ Dirty (Illusory Correlation) 5. Avenue Q Everyone’s A Little Bit Racist (Modern Racism) 6. Michael Jackson Black Or White (Reducing Prejudice) 7. John Lennon Imagine (Reducing Prejudice)
  2. 2. CHAPTER 11:
 
 STEREOTYPES
 PREJUDICE
 DISCRIMINATION Melanie B. Tannenbaum, M.A. Spring 2014
  3. 3. Chapter Overview Characterizing Intergroup Bias ! Intergroup Bias: Different Perspectives ! Economic Perspective ! Motivational Perspective ! Cognitive Perspective ! Being a Member of a Stigmatized Group ! Reducing Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination
  4. 4. Chapter Overview Characterizing Intergroup Bias ! Intergroup Bias: Different Perspectives ! Economic Perspective ! Motivational Perspective ! Cognitive Perspective ! Being a Member of a Stigmatized Group ! Reducing Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination
  5. 5. Do these all mean the same thing? ! A) Yes ! B) No ! ! They are similar, but there are actually differences in what they refer to & mean Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination
  6. 6. Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination Stereotype ! Belief that certain attributes are characteristic of members of particular groups ! Cognition Prejudice ! A negative (or positive) attitude toward a certain group that is applied to its individual members ! Emotion Discrimination ! Unfair treatment of members of a particular group based on their membership in that group ! Behavior
  7. 7. Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination If someone is “racist” towards a certain racial group... ! ! Stereotype: People in Racial Group are all bad/stupid/lazy/ smart/athletic/rich. ! ! Prejudice: I don’t like people in Racial Group, so I don’t like Bob because he is a member of this group. ! ! Discrimination: Bob applied for a job in my company, but I won’t hire him, because he’s in Racial Group.
  8. 8. But what does it mean to be “racist”? Does all prejudice look the same? NO! ! There are two main types: ! Traditional ! Modern ! This applies to all forms of prejudice (sexism, homophobia, anti-Semitism...), not just racism.
  9. 9. Traditional Racism Prejudice against a racial group that is consciously acknowledged and openly expressed by the individual ! Relatively rare in contemporary society
  10. 10. Modern Racism Prejudice against a racial group that exists alongside the rejection of explicit racist beliefs Example: Opposing racial segregation/discrimination, but treating outgroup members differently in more subtle ways (e.g. sitting further away, being less likely to hire them) More “subtle” indicators...not necessarily verbalized.
  11. 11. Modern Racism Hodson et al., 2002 !Participants filled out a modern racism scale about African-Americans !Participants rated a sample of job applicants ■ Half were White, and half were Black Results !When the applicant was either SUPER EXCELLENT or SUPER TERRIBLE, white and black applicants were rated the same. !When the applicant had a some-good-some-bad resume, people high in modern racism rated the white applicants higher. ! Modern racism is suppressed when expressing it would clearly look “racist,” but emerges when it seems “safe.”
  12. 12. Modern Racism Gaertner & Dovidio, 1977 !White participants entered the lab & told they would be interacting with a) 1 person or b) a group (all actors) !All people were seated in single-person cubicles and spoke through an intercom system !At one point, one of the confederates indicated he was having a medical emergency; the confederate was either a) White or b) Black. How many participants left their cubicles to go help? !When interacting 1-on-1, most help, whether Black (94%) or White (81%) !When interacting with a group, most help the White victim (75%), but not the Black victim (38%) ! “Oh, there are a bunch of people…someone else will help.”
  13. 13. Test Your Knowledge What is the correct term for the following examples? ! If I’m the boss and I see an application from someone who went to Indiana or Michigan, I won’t hire them! ! A. Stereotype ! B. Prejudice ! C. Discrimination
  14. 14. Test Your Knowledge What is the correct term for the following examples? ! People who go to Indiana or Michigan instead of Illinois are stupid and clearly have poor judgment. ! A. Stereotype ! B. Prejudice ! C. Discrimination
  15. 15. Test Your Knowledge What is the correct term for the following examples? ! My friend Amanda decided to go to Indiana. I don’t like her anymore. ! A. Stereotype ! B. Prejudice ! C. Discrimination
  16. 16. Ambivalent Sexism Glick & Fiske, 2001 Two parts: ! Hostile Sexism ! Benevolent Sexism
  17. 17. Hostile Sexism What you typically think of when you think about “sexism.” Domination, hostility, and degradation ! “Women are less competent than men.”
  18. 18. Benevolent Sexism Attitudes of protection, idealization, and affection towards women in traditional gender roles In other words, chivalry. “Women should be treated delicately” “In an emergency, women should be rescued before men.”
  19. 19. Ambivalent Sexism Hostile and benevolent sexism often co-exist “Women are incompetent… ...so men should protect them and take care of them.”
  20. 20. Ambivalent Sexism Benevolent is just as bad as Hostile…and in some ways, it’s worse. ! Justifies negative stereotypes ■ “Women are so kind & nurturing, they don’t make good CEOs/presidents.” ! Feeling “responsible” for women’s welfare implies male superiority ! Women are only highly regarded if they fit traditional gender roles ■ If they step outside these roles, they suddenly face criticism & discrimination
  21. 21. Ambivalent Sexism Women often view individual benevolent sexism acts as positive. ! “He always pays!” ! “He always opens the door!” ! As a result, women are less likely to “act out” against it. ! Recognizing this (appropriately) as sexism can come across as being oversensitive and obnoxious, especially since so many women don’t take issue with it, which sets a norm.
  22. 22. Test Your Knowledge Which one of the following statements is supported by research on ambivalent sexism? ! A. Someone cannot endorse both benevolent sexism and hostile sexism. ! B. Negative stereotypes are bad, but positive stereotypes are not. ! C. Positive stereotypes can have troublesome consequences. ! D. Ambivalently sexist attitudes are really easy to change.
  23. 23. Measuring Prejudicial Attitudes We’ve gone over some attitude measures ! Remember back to Chapter 7! ! Make sure you complete an IAT by this Thursday ! https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/ ! This is a common way of measuring implicit attitudes towards various racial, gender, religious, etc. groups ! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5Q5FQfXZag
  24. 24. IAT: Some Comments Many people interpret the fact that this measures “implicit associations” to mean that it measures “hidden” or “secret” attitudes. ! ! This is not necessarily true. ! ! Two reasons implicit attitudes might differ from explicit: ! 1) People are trying to hide/mask their “true” attitudes. ! 2) People are not aware of these implicit associations ■ These are not actually representative of their explicit beliefs
  25. 25. IAT: Some Comments Some people believe that the IAT does not actually measure “attitudes” as much as it measures “cultural knowledge.” ! ! People who work in activism, people who are members of minority groups, etc. often show “bias” on the IATs – sometimes even more than the average population! ! ! This indicates that the “strength of the association” (e.g. between “White” and “Good”) might not indicate what you actually believe, but how much you know about cultural stereotypes/how much you’ve been exposed to these cultural ideas (that makes them stronger & more accessible).
  26. 26. Test Your Knowledge Jenny took the implicit association test (IAT) and found that she responded faster when “strong” words were paired with male names, compared with when “strong” words were paired with female names. What does this finding suggest? ! A. She has a stereotype that women are stronger than men B. She has a stereotype that men are stronger than women C. She has a stereotype that male names are more attractive than female names D. She does not have any stereotypes about gender and strength
  27. 27. Chapter Overview Characterizing Intergroup Bias ! Intergroup Bias: Different Perspectives ! Economic Perspective ! Motivational Perspective ! Cognitive Perspective ! Being a Member of a Stigmatized Group ! Reducing Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination
  28. 28. Different Perspectives Intergroup bias comes from... ! Economic Perspective ! Competition with outgroups over valuable/scarce resources. ! Motivational Perspective ! Identification with an ingroup, frustration, or social identity. ! Cognitive Perspective ! We are “fast and frugal” with our thinking patterns.
  29. 29. Different Perspectives Intergroup bias comes from... ! Economic Perspective ! Competition with outgroups over valuable/scarce resources. ! Motivational Perspective ! Identification with an ingroup, frustration, or social identity. ! Cognitive Perspective ! We are “fast and frugal” with our thinking patterns.
  30. 30. Economic Perspective Realistic Group Conflict Theory ! LeVine & Campbell, 1972 ! ! When groups compete for limited resources, the groups experience conflict, prejudice, and discrimination. What are limited resources? ! Territory ! Jobs ! Power Prejudice and discrimination should be strongest among groups that stand to lose the most if another group succeeds.
  31. 31. Economic Perspective Some of the strongest anti-black prejudice occurred shortly after the Civil Rights Movement became successful. ! ! This prejudice was strongest among the white working class. ! ! Why? Working class jobs became a threatened commodity for White Americans once millions of Black Americans were allowed to apply.
  32. 32. Robber’s Cave Sherif et al., 1961 ! 22 fifth-grade boys (all strangers) participated in a 2 ½ week summer camp at Robbers Cave State Park in OK. The boys were divided into groups of 11
  33. 33. Robber’s Cave Phase One ! Groups independently engaged in activities designed to foster unity (preparing meals, pitching tents, etc.) ! Neither group knew about the other group’s existence
  34. 34. Robber’s Cave Phase Two ! The groups were brought together for a five-day tournament; winners got medals and pocket knives ! The other group is now an obstacle to resources (prizes) ! This led to conflict, trash-talking, stealing, and burning the other group’s flag, in addition to in-group favoritism. Eek!
  35. 35. Robber’s Cave Phase Three ! The researchers tried a few things in an attempt to “reverse” the prejudice and reduce conflict between the 2 groups Attempt #1: Mere Exposure ! The boys were brought together in noncompetitive settings ! This failed…The boys insulted each other, fought, etc.
  36. 36. Robber’s Cave Phase Three ! The researchers tried a few things in an attempt to “reverse” the prejudice and reduce conflict between the 2 groups Attempt #2: Superordinate Goals ! The researchers created larger goals that made the groups of boys have to depend on each other in order to succeed ■ Disrupted the camp’s water supply (boys had to fix the pipes together), supply truck “broke down” (boys had to jump start it together)... ! Required both groups to work together for a common goal ! This worked…Prejudice went away! ■ On the ride home, the boys took the same bus, shared candy, etc.
  37. 37. Robber’s Cave: Important Points ! There were no differences in background, appearance, or history of conflict; intergroup hostility developed anyway ! All that is required for conflict is economic competition ! Economic Competition = Sufficient for intergroup bias ! Competition against outgroups often increases cohesion ! The intergroup conflict led the ingroups themselves to adopt group names, social norms, create a shared social identity, etc.
  38. 38. Test Your Knowledge What is the most important takeaway point from the Robbers Cave study? ! A. When resources are scarce, you won’t get ingroup cohesion. ! B. A superordinate goal helps reduce intergroup conflict. ! C. Simply seeing each other more helps conflict go away. ! D. Eleven year old boys love fighting and candy.
  39. 39. Robber’s Cave: Important Points ! Intergroup conflict can be diminished by forcing groups to work together and depend on each other ! Certain groups (like the military) do this very well ! Certain groups (like Fortune 500 companies) do...not. ! How do you think universities do at this? ! A) Good ! B) Bad
  40. 40. Military vs. Universities Universities do surprisingly poorly...this is one reason why there might be a lot of self-segregation and early integration efforts were difficult. ! Grade curves and the classroom structure encourages competition over cooperation. ! No real efforts to make people from different groups work together for a common goal. ! The military does this very well; makes people from many different groups work together, breaks down barriers quickly.
  41. 41. Jigsaw Classroom Proposed by Aronson ! Different members of a class have to present different parts of a lesson to the other classmates ! No one can learn without the help of the others; everyone plays a part, they all work together towards the “common goal” of learning ! Students in these classrooms show lower levels of prejudice/ discrimination, more intergroup friendships
  42. 42. Different Perspectives Intergroup bias comes from... ! Economic Perspective ! Competition with outgroups over valuable/scarce resources. ! Motivational Perspective ! Identification with an ingroup, frustration, or social identity. ! Cognitive Perspective ! We are “fast and frugal” with our thinking patterns.
  43. 43. Motivational Perspective ! Social Identity Theory ! A person’s self-concept and self-esteem are derived from personal identity AND ingroup status/accomplishments. ! ! People are motivated to view their ingroups favorably because this enhances self-concept and self-esteem.
  44. 44. Self-Concept Social Identities UIUC Student Psychology Major Midwesterner Personal Identities Boyfriend/Girlfriend Roommate Son/Daughter Things associated with these groups will reflect well (or poorly) on YOU.
  45. 45. Minimal Group Paradigm Researchers create groups based on arbitrary and meaningless criteria to see if they can get people to develop intergroup bias as a result. ! Seriously meaningless...like flipping a coin. Shoelace color. Really stupid stuff. ! Results: In many different experiments, we find that people show a preference and bias for the ingroup, even when these distinctions are meaningless.
  46. 46. Minimal Group Paradigm You have developed superpowers, and you can now determine who will win baseball games this season. But, there’s a catch. You only have two options. Either... ! A) Both the Chicago Cubs and the Chicago White Sox win the same number of games & hold the top ranking in their relative leagues. OR B) Your favored team will do OK (though not the best), but you can guarantee that your rival will be dead last in the standings and have a terrible season.
  47. 47. Minimal Group Paradigm ! ! Would you prefer for... ! A. The Cubs and the Sox to be tied in how well they do? ! B. Your team to do OK, but your rival to be in dead last?
  48. 48. Minimal Group Paradigm ! If given the chance to distribute rewards across the ingroup vs. outgroup, individuals want the ingroup to have more than the outgroup, even if it means they get less overall. ! ! Would you prefer for... ! The ingroup and outgroup to get $10 each? ! The ingroup to get $7 and the outgroup to get $3?
  49. 49. Minimal Group Paradigm ! People overwhelmingly prefer the $7/$3 option because it maximizes ingroup success relative to the outgroup. ! ! Ingroup Bias: Because identity-related self-esteem is based in part on group membership, we’re motivated to boost the status of our ingroups.
  50. 50. Basking In Reflected Glory Self-esteem can be enhanced by positive ingroup evaluations. ! ! ! Cialdini et al., 1976 ! Basking in Reflected Glory ! Taking pride in the accomplishments of those we feel associated with in some way ! When ingroups succeed, we have higher self-esteem.
  51. 51. Basking In Reflected Glory People who take particularly strong pride in their group affiliations are more vulnerable to ingroup favoritism when placed in minimal group situations ! People who are highly identified with a group react to criticism of the group as if it were criticism of the self.
  52. 52. This can also work the other way... Self-esteem can also be enhanced by negative evaluations of outgroup. ! ! Remember...people are motivated for ingroup success relative to the outgroup.
  53. 53. Test Your Knowledge Which of the following is not basking in reflected glory? ! A. Wearing your school’s T-Shirt the day after a big NCAA win. ! B. Feeling happy when you get an A on a paper. ! C. Posting more pictures of you with a friend on Facebook after that friend wins a big campus election, so everyone sees you know her. ! D. A parent putting a bumper sticker on his/her car that reads, “My child is an Honor Student.”
  54. 54. Test Your Knowledge What do studies using the minimal group paradigm show? ! A. You only get ingroup favoritism for important, meaningful groups. ! B. Ingroup favoritism is stronger in diverse groups. ! C. Ingroup favoritism is stronger in very similar groups. ! D. Ingroup favoritism will happen for any group, even those based on arbitrary or meaningless criteria.
  55. 55. Is Prejudice Really
 Self-Image Maintenance? Fein & Spencer, 1997 Participants told that they failed or aced an intelligence test ! Self-esteem either threatened or affirmed ! Participants watched an interview of a job applicant ! She was either clearly Jewish or clearly Non-Jewish ! Participants... ! Rated the job applicant ! Reported their personal self-esteem
  56. 56. Julie Goldberg Volunteer for Hillel ! ! Member of Jewish Sorority ! ! Star of David necklace ! ! Hair back in a “JAP Clip” ! Participant words, not mine. Maria D’Agostino Volunteer for Catholic Social Services ! ! Non-Cultural Sorority ! ! Cross necklace ! ! Hair down Is Prejudice Really
 Self-Image Maintenance?
  57. 57. 0 25 50 75 100 Positive Feedback Negative Feedback Maria D'Agostino Julie Goldberg Candidate’s Personality Rating Is Prejudice Really
 Self-Image Maintenance? If their self-esteem wasn’t threatened, they didn’t derogate the Jewish candidate because there was no reason to do so.
  58. 58. 0 25 50 75 100 Positive Feedback Negative Feedback Maria D'Agostino Julie Goldberg Candidate’s Personality Rating Is Prejudice Really
 Self-Image Maintenance? However, if they got negative feedback, they coped with self-esteem threat by dissing the Jewish candidate
  59. 59. 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 Positive Feedback Negative Feedback Maria D'Agostino Julie Goldberg Self-Esteem After Rating Candidate Is Prejudice Really
 Self-Image Maintenance? Furthermore, the negative ratings helped to boost their self-esteem.
  60. 60. Is Prejudice Really
 Self-Image Maintenance? Sinclair & Kunda, 1999: Doctors & Race Participants were praised or criticized by a doctor The doctor was either black or white Participants then performed a lexical decision task (LDT) ! This is basically an implicit measure (like the IAT!) ! Participants see strings of letters and have to decide as quickly as they can if it’s a word or not The more “accessible” certain knowledge is (i.e. the more recently you’ve thought about it), the faster you’ll be to recognize words related to that knowledge
  61. 61. Stereotype Activation & Threat 0.0015 0.0016 0.0017 0.0017 0.0018 Positive Feedback Negative Feedback White Doctor Black Doctor How Quickly They Recognize “Doctor” Stereotype Words When people got positive feedback from the doctor, it activated “Doctor” stereotypes.
  62. 62. Stereotype Activation & Threat 0.0015 0.0016 0.0017 0.0017 0.0018 Positive Feedback Negative Feedback White Doctor Black Doctor How Quickly They Recognize “Black” Stereotype Words When people got negative feedback from the doctor, it activated “Black” stereotypes.
  63. 63. Stereotype Activation & Threat 0.0015 0.0016 0.0017 0.0017 0.0018 Positive Feedback Negative Feedback Doctor Stereotype Black Stereotypes For Black Doctors...
  64. 64. Stereotype Activation & Threat 0.0015 0.0016 0.0016 0.0017 0.0017 Positive Feedback Negative Feedback Doctor Stereotype Black Stereotypes For White Doctors...
  65. 65. Different Perspectives Intergroup bias comes from... ! Economic Perspective ! Competition with outgroups over valuable/scarce resources. ! Motivational Perspective ! Identification with an ingroup, frustration, or social identity. ! Cognitive Perspective ! We are “fast and frugal” with our thinking patterns.
  66. 66. Summed up in two sentences... “The real environment is altogether too big, too complex, and too fleeting for direct acquaintance. ! We are not equipped to deal with so much subtlety, so much variety, so many permutations and combinations... ! we have to reconstruct it on a simpler model before we can manage with it.” – Lippman, 1922
  67. 67. Summed up in one picture...
  68. 68. The Cognitive Perspective Schemas, schemas, schemas and Heuristics, heuristics, heuristics
  69. 69. The Cognitive Perspective Stereotypes are just schemas about groups of people ! ! Schemas are knowledge structures that use information you already have as a shortcut for assessing new situations ! ! Stereotypes can be useful because they decrease the time/ effort needed to deal with the environment
  70. 70. The Cognitive Perspective Stereotypes become harmful when rigidly over-applied. ! ! When you rely on schemas and automatic judgments to dictate how you respond in any one particular situation (or to any one person), that’s when it’s a big problem. ! ! Flash mob is cancelled...the flash mob is cancelled.
  71. 71. The Cognitive Perspective Bodenhausen, 1990 ! ! Participants who self-identified as “morning” or “night” people came into the lab early in the morning or late at night ! They read scenarios in which the main character belonged to different stereotyped groups, and he is accused of engaging in an undesirable behavior (like cheating on a test). ! Is the main character guilty?
  72. 72. The Cognitive Perspective Participants at the “low point” of their circadian rhythms (e.g. “night people” were there in the AM or “morning people” were there in the PM) were more likely to rely on stereotypes when making their judgments. ! Example: “Night people” tested in the morning were more likely to say that an athlete cheated.
  73. 73. How Stereotypes Can Be Useful Participants performed two tasks at the same time ! ! Task 1: Form impression of a hypothetical person described by a bunch of traits presented on the computer ! ! Task 2: Listen to a tape-recorded lecture about Indonesia
  74. 74. Stereotypes Can Be Useful For half of the participants, the trait terms were accompanied by a relevant stereotype ! Example: “Rebellious,” “Aggressive,” “Skinhead.” ! ! ! ! ! ! At the end, participants were given a quiz on the trait terms and on Indonesia
  75. 75. Quiz Scores 0 2.25 4.5 6.75 9 Stereotype No Stereotype Trait Quiz Indonesia Quiz Overall Quiz Score People who had stereotypes to help remembered more of both types of info.
  76. 76. Test Your Knowledge You will be most likely to form judgments based on stereotypes if you are... ! A. Introverted ! B. Sleepy ! C. Making these judgments early in the morning ! D. Poorly Educated
  77. 77. Stereotypes Can Be Harmful ! Even though our knowledge of schemas and the cognitive perspective says that stereotypes can be useful (for processing speed), they are also harmful. ! ! They are especially harmful when people rely on stereotypes in an exclusive, rigid, or automatic way
  78. 78. Stereotypes Can Be Harmful Outgroup Homogeneity Effect ! The tendency to assume that members of outgroups are “all alike,” whereas members of ingroups are varied and distinct. ! You encounter the ingroup all the time, so unique/identifying information is most useful, frequent, and attention-grabbing. ! If you rarely encounter outgroup members, the only information you may have about them are stereotypes.
  79. 79. Stereotypes Can Be Harmful Princeton & Rutgers Study ! Princeton and Rutgers participants watched a videotape of a student making a simple decision. ■ “Should I listen to rock or classical music?” ! ½ of them thought the student was from Princeton ! ½ of them thought the student was from Rutgers ! “What percent of students from the same university as this student would make the same choice?”
  80. 80. Stereotypes Can Be Harmful Princeton & Rutgers Study ! Participants made higher percentage estimates when they thought the student was from the other university. ! ! People assume more variability of habits/opinions in their ingroup, but assume that “all outgroup members are alike.”
  81. 81. Stereotypes Can Be Harmful Illusory Correlation ! An incorrect belief that two things are related when they actually are not Distinctive (low frequency) events capture attention ! Minority members are, by definition, low frequency ! Negative behaviors also occur less frequently than positive As a consequence, negative behaviors from minority members are doubly distinct. Negative behaviors from minority members are likely to seem much more correlated than they really are.
  82. 82. Automatic vs. Controlled Processing Dovidio et al., 2002 ! White participants were brought into the lab Measured explicit and implicit attitudes toward AAs ! Engaged in two 3-minute conversations (recorded) ! One with a white student, one with a black student ! Independent judges either saw the entire videos, or the visual footage with the sound removed
  83. 83. Automatic vs. Controlled Processing Dovidio et al., 2002 ! Explicit Attitudes Predicted: How differentially friendly they were in the whole videos, participants’ ratings of their own differential levels of friendliness. ! Implicit Attitudes Predicted: How differentially friendly they were in the visual-only videos, the conversation partners’ ratings of their friendliness.
  84. 84. Police Officer’s Dilemma Correll et al., 2002 ! Participants played a videogame in which they moved through a virtual building. At unpredictable points, a person would pop out from behind an obstacle. ! Some were white, some were black ! Some held a gun, some held a neutral object (phone) Participants had to shoot as quickly as possible if the target was armed, and not do anything if he wasn’t ! http://home.uchicago.edu/~jcorrell/TPOD.html
  85. 85. Police Officer’s Dilemma
  86. 86. Police Officer’s Dilemma Correll et al., 2002 ! People were more likely to accidentally shoot unarmed Black targets than unarmed White targets ! People were more likely to accidentally fail to shoot armed White targets than armed Black targets
  87. 87. Police Officer’s Dilemma Correll et al., 2002 ! Rationale: Many people hold stereotypes that associate African-Americans with hostility and violence; the targets’ race primes these thoughts, which temporarily influences how participants perceive the objects in their hands ! Extensive experience with this sort of task can reduce the tendency to overshoot unarmed black targets, which is...hopeful, at least.
  88. 88. “Stereotypic beliefs about women’s roles, for example, may enable one to see correctly that a woman in a dark room is threading a needle rather than tying a fishing lure... ! ...but they may also cause one to mistakenly assume that her goal is embroidery rather than cardiac surgery.” – Dan Gilbert Construal
  89. 89. Construal The “Shoving Study” (Duncan, 1976) ! White participants watched a video of two men in a heated discussion; coded behavior into categories At one point, one man shoved the other ! ½ saw a white man do the shoving, ½ saw a black man ! How did participants code this behavior?
  90. 90. Construal The “Shoving Study” (Duncan, 1976) ! ! White Pusher: Coded the behavior as “playing around.” ! Black Pusher: Coded the behavior as “aggressive.”
  91. 91. Construal Fundamental Attribution Error (Sort Of) Revisited If someone is prejudiced against a certain group/person... ! Stereotype-Inconsistent Behavior = Situational Attribution ! Stereotype-Consistent Behavior = Dispositional Attribution Joke/Stunt What She Likes Reading
  92. 92. Chapter Overview Characterizing Intergroup Bias ! Intergroup Bias: Different Perspectives ! Economic Perspective ! Motivational Perspective ! Cognitive Perspective ! Being a Member of a Stigmatized Group ! Reducing Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination
  93. 93. Attributional Ambiguity Members of stigmatized groups may be uncertain if the treatment they receive is due to themselves personally or due to their group membership ! Why didn’t you get hired? ! Why did you get into that school? ! Why did you get that award? ! Have you ever experienced this? ! A) Yes ! B) No
  94. 94. Attributional Ambiguity Crocker et al., 1991: Feedback and Ambiguity ! ½ White participants ½ Black participants ! ½ got positive feedback ½ got negative feedback ! ½ thought the other person could see them through a one-way mirror ½ did not think this
  95. 95. Attributional Ambiguity Crocker et al., 1991: Feedback and Ambiguity ! Self-esteem for White participants went up after positive feedback, down after negative feedback, no matter what. ! Self-esteem for Black participants only changed if they thought the other person could not see them. ! “Do they really feel this way, or just saying that because they know what I look like and are changing their response because of it?” ! Think about the discounting principle. Multiple causes.
  96. 96. Stereotype Threat The fear that we will confirm a stereotype that others have because of a group we’re in ! ! ! Group members typically know the stereotypes that others hold about them/their groups
  97. 97. Stereotype Threat In a performance situation, people often want to prove that the stereotype’s not true ! This leads to anxiety about accidentally confirming it ! This actually makes it more likely one will confirm it ! Claude Steele on stereotype threat
  98. 98. Stereotype Threat ½ participants told that there’s “no gender difference” ! ½ told that men tend to do better ! In the second condition, women do worse.
  99. 99. Stereotype Threat Which of the following findings illustrates stereotype threat? ! (A) White male students do worse on math tests when they are surrounded by Asian students. (B) Female Asian students do worse on math tests when prompted to think about being female, but better when prompted to think about being Asian. (C) Black students perform worse at golf when it’s described as a test of “sports intelligence,” but White students do worse on the same task when it’s described as a test of “natural athletic ability” (D) Black students perform worse on aptitude tests when asked to indicate their race on the test booklet before starting. (E) All of the above.
  100. 100. Self-Fulfilling Prophecies Interview Study (Word et al., 1974) ! White Princeton undergrads interviewed black and white men pretending to be job applicants; these interviews were recorded. ! When coders analyzed these videos, they found that interviewers faced with black applicants were more likely to sit further away, cut the interview short, and perform other “modern racism” behaviors.
  101. 101. Self-Fulfilling Prophecies Interview Study (Word et al., 1974) ! In a follow-up study, actors were trained to act like the interviewers from the first study when they interacted with either White or Black applicants. ! The actors then interviewed a new batch of participants, all of whom were White. ! Independent judges rated the applicants from this study.
  102. 102. Self-Fulfilling Prophecies Interview Study (Word et al., 1974) ! ! ! Applicants who were interviewed by actors trying to act like how the first interviewers had interviewed the Black applicants were rated more negatively.
  103. 103. Self-Fulfilling Prophecies Interview Study (Word et al., 1974) ! Interviewers came in with negative expectations. ! ! They acted in ways that elicited negative behaviors they expected. ! ! Yes, the Black applicants usually acted more negatively in Study 1... ! ...but so did a later sample of White applicants when they were treated the same way by the interviewers.
  104. 104. Chapter Overview Characterizing Intergroup Bias ! Intergroup Bias: Different Perspectives ! Economic Perspective ! Motivational Perspective ! Cognitive Perspective ! Being a Member of a Stigmatized Group ! Reducing Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination
  105. 105. A Class Divided: “Eye Of The Storm”
  106. 106. Other Videos More about the IAT
  107. 107. Top Ten Things To Know Stereotypes vs. Prejudice vs. Discrimination ! Modern vs. Traditional Racism ! What are the differences? ! Ambivalent Sexism ! How do benevolent and hostile sexism relate to each other? ! What are they? ! Realistic Group Conflict Theory ! Why does prejudice/discrimination arise? ! Which group is better for intergroup relations, the military or universities? What is the minimal group paradigm? How does it relate to self-esteem? ! Automatic vs. Controlled Processes ! Outgroup Homogeneity Effect ! Illusory Correlations & Stereotypes ! Stereotype Threat ! What is it? ! Self-Fulfilling Prophecies

×