• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
474 pol psych prejudice (2013) up

474 pol psych prejudice (2013) up






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    474 pol psych prejudice (2013) up 474 pol psych prejudice (2013) up Presentation Transcript

    • Written Assignment #2: Counteracting theTactics of Political Propaganda In the first written assignment, you were employed by a propagandist who investedheavily in your ads, which are expected to air in time for the 2014 national elections.However, after designing a brilliant ad campaign, your employer decided to investelsewhere and you were let go. After getting over your sense of injustice and anger atbeing summarily fired for a job well done, you also felt remorse for being employed asa willing propaganda tool for such a ruthless political action committee. Good news, however! You now have a chance to wash away your ethicaltransgressions from Written Assignment 1 and make some additional money byproducing a series of ads for a non-profit group, (name here), whose sole purpose isfunding ads to counteract political propaganda like the ads you designed in the firstwritten assignment. Use the final section of Age of Propaganda (Chs 38-40), “Counteracting theTacticsof Propaganda,” to design an ad campaign to nullify, neutralize and otherwisecounteract the ads in your original ad campaign forWritten Assignment 1. Ch 38: “Is Forewarned Forearmed?” Ch 39: “What can we do to stop propaganda in its tracks?” Ch 40: “Peitho’s children” Try to use as many of the ideas in Chs 38-40 as you reasonably can to design your adcampaign. Explain the principles and apply them appropriately.
    • Why study prejudice and whyfocus on racial prejudice? Prejudice leads to discrimination Studying prejudice toward one group(e.g., African Americans) helps us tounderstand prejudice toward other groups(e.g., sexism, gays & lesbians, Latinos) Group centrism in American politics:Support for policies is influenced byattitudes toward groups that areperceived, rightly or wrongly, as theprimary beneficiaries It’s where System 2 meets System 1 thinking:Explicit and Implicit measures of prejudice
    • Changing racial attitudes Paul Krugman, “Politics in Black andWhite” (NYT, 9/24/07) “It would be wrong to suggest that the nation has made noprogress. Racism, though not gone, is greatly diminished: bothopinion polls and daily experience suggest that we are trulybecoming a more tolerant, open society.” a few paragraphs later… “The reality is that things haven’t changed nearly as much aspeople think. Racial tension, especially in the South, has nevergone away, and has never stopped being important.And raceremains one of the defining factors in modern American politics.” THE CENTRAL PARK FIVE (1989)
    • Field Experiment Studies of Racial& Ethnic Discrimination Many racial and ethnic groups in the United States, includingblacks, Hispanics,Asians, American Indians, and others, havehistorically faced severe discrimination. Today, large differences in outcomes among racial and ethnicgroups continue to exist in employment, income and wealth,housing, education, criminal justice, health, and other areas. Although many factors may contribute to such differences, theirsize and extent suggest that various forms of discriminatorytreatment persist in U.S. society and serve to undercut theachievement of equal opportunity. How to assess discrimination: Audit studies of racialdiscrimination Matched pairs of job seekers, apartment and housing seekers who areidentical in every respect (resume, qualifications, demeanor) except theirrace.
    • Job Discrimination Field Experiments:Milwaukee & NYC (2004), Devah Pager, Bruce Western To study contemporary discrimination we conducted a fieldexperiments in the low-wage labor markets of Milwaukee,Wisconsin and NewYork City. The experiments recruited white, black, and Latino jobapplicants, called testers, who were matched ondemographic characteristics and interpersonal skills.Thetesters were given equivalent resumes and sent to apply intandem for hundreds of entry-level jobs. Our results show that black applicants were only half as likely toreceive a callback or job offer relative to equally qualifiedwhites. In fact, the extent of discrimination was so great thatblack and Latino applicants with clean backgrounds fared nobetter than a white applicant just released from prison. Together these results point to the subtle but systematic formsof discrimination that continue to shape employmentopportunities for low-wage workers.
    • Why is group prejudice soubiquitous in politics? Politics is group centered around concrete groups vs. broad, abstract ideological principlesof liberalism-conservatism Reality (e.g., Social Security & elders) & Perception (Associationsin memory) Cognitive misers use heuristics—both prejudice &stereotypes are heuristics that serve goals of efficiency aswell as motivational goals. Political rhetoric that often frames issues in terms of groupsusing “coded” language. Racial stereotypes in the news and film.
    • Explicit = survey measures tapping a verbal responseExplicit Measures of prejudice & racism
    • Social Dominance Orientation,Jim Sidanius and Felicia PrattoDefinition: the “general desire for unequal relations among social groups, regardlessof whether this means ingroup domination or ingroup subordination”Measure:1. Some groups of people are simply inferior to other groups.2. In getting what you want, it is sometimes necessary to use force against other groups.3. It’s OK if some groups have more of a chance in life than others.4. To get ahead in life, it is sometimes necessary to step on other groups.5. If certain groups stayed in their place, we would have fewer problems.6. It’s probably a good thing that certain groups are at the top and other groups are at the bottom.7. Inferior groups should stay in their place.8. Sometimes other groups must be kept in their place.9. It would be good if groups could be equal.10. Group equality should be our ideal.11. All groups should be given an equal chance in life.12. We should do what we can to equalize conditions for different groups.13. Increased social equality is beneficial to society.14. We would have fewer problems if we treated people more equally.15. We should strive to make incomes as equal as possible.16. No group should dominate in society. Keying is reversed on questions 9 through 16, to control for acquiescence.
    • Problems with SocialDominance Orientation Few people agree with more extreme socialdominance statements, like “To get ahead inlife, it is sometimes necessary to step onother groups.” The measure includes many statements fromother scales and orientations (e.g., Equality,Conservatism).
    • Symbolic Racism (aka New Racism, RacialResentment), David Sears, Don KinderDefinition: In response to public abhorrence of overt racism, prejudice has goneunderground, finding its expression in more subtle forms. Bigots of the current era willcloak their racist sentiments under the guise of a defense of noble and important values,like Individualism and Equality, but these are rationalizations for prejudice.Measure: "Irish, Italians, Jewish1, and other minorities overcame prejudice and worked theirway up. Blacks should do the same without special favors.“ Generations of slavery have created conditions that make it difficult for Blacks towork their way out of the lower class." . "Its really a matter of some people just not trying hard enough; if Blacks would onlytry harder, they could be just as well off as whites.". “Over the past few years, Blacks have gotten less than they deserve." "Over the past few years, Blacks have gotten more economically than they deserve." "How much discrimination against Blacks do you feel there is in the United Statestoday, limiting their chances to get ahead?“
    • Race and the 2012 election Romney’s welfare ad warns that, “under Obama’s plan, youwouldn’t have to work and you wouldn’t have to train for a job.They just send you a check and welfare to work goes back to beingplain old welfare.” Politifact rated it “pants-on-fire.”The Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler gave it four Pinocchios. Romney’s ads are puzzlingly anachronistic. Welfare is a shrunkenprogram. When a campaign begins doubling and tripling down on anunusual line of attack, it’s because it has reams of data showingthe attack is working. What’s worrying is why this ad might beworking. Among those who saw it,• reports MichaelTesler, racialresentment affected whether people thought Romney will helpthe poor, the middle class and African Americans. Moreover,seeing the ad did not activate other attitudes, such as party orideological self-identification. It only primed racial resentment. Romney’s welfare ads are not racist. But the evidence suggeststhat they work particularly well if the viewer is racist, or at leastracially resentful.
    • Subsequent experiments Tesler has shown that racial attitudes appear to bebleeding into almost everything in the Obama era. Voters with higher levels of racial resentment weremore likely to oppose the nomination of SupremeCourt Justice Sonia Sotomayor if they heard Obama’sname than if they didn’t. The same held true for health-care reform. In a third study, he showed respondents a picture of aPortuguese Water Dog and told half it wasTedKennedy’s dog and the other half it was Obama’s dog.When respondents with higher levels of racialresentment heard it was Obamas dog, they weremore likely to disapprove of it. Race is hard to talk about. For one thing, by beinghonest about its continuing role in American life,people often think you’re calling them racists, or, atthe least, “playing the race card.” Even in 2008,Obama only addressed the issue when the JeremiahWright scandal forced him to. And yet, race is beingtalked about, at least to those who are listening for it.
    • Problems with Symbolic Racism? The scale may confound conservativeorientations with prejudice toward Blacks. Is denial of discrimination = prejudice orideology or ignorance? Rejoinder from those who use the SymbolicRacism scale: It’s not any one item that taps racial prejudice butthe overall trend in responses over a series ofitems.
    • Oneproblemwithmeasuringracialandotherformsofprejudiceissocialdesirabilitybias.AnotherproblemistheinfluenceofSystem1thinking(nextweekonImplicitPrejudice).
    • Problems with measuring prejudice Social desirability bias. New Racism (symbolic racism) is one attempt to deal withsocial desirability bias, since it provides a “cover” forprejudice in traditional values like individualism. Another partial solution is survey experiments that askdifferent random halves of the sample different questions(e.g., Obama’s vs.Ted Kennedy’s dog; policies withObama’s name vs. without his name; black vs white welfaremother; morphed picture of candidates with Afro-centric vsEuro-centric features. Stereotyping measures (Piston) List experiment (Kuklinski) Another problem is the influence of System 1thinking (next week: measures of Implicit Prejudice).
    • HowExplicitRacialPrejudice(i.e.,racialstereotyping)HurtObama inthe2008Election Spencer Piston
    • Survey Questions measuringracial stereotyping, prejudice Question:Why subtract ratings ofWhites fromthose of Blacks to measure racial prejudice? Similar measures used to assess prejudicetoward Latinos, Asians.
    • Negative racial stereotypes: Whites rateWhites more favorably than BlacksFinding: Self-administered stereotype questionsyield more negative stereotypes, presumablybecause they are less inflated by social desirabilitybias.Note:• This figure makes the degree of negative stereotypingamong Whites appear greater than the actual measurebecause the percentages include anyone who evenslightly rated Whites more favorably than Blacks,ignoring the degree of difference.• Respondents rate “Blacks in general” & “Whites ingeneral” on 1-7 scales ranging from hard working tolazy and intelligent, not intelligent. If a respondent rateswhites even 1 point on a 7-point scale less favorably,this is an indication of negative stereotyping, orprejudice.Next Question: to what extent do more negativestereotypes of Blacks than Whites predict voting forObama in 2008?
    • Impact of Prejudice on Vote Choice,1992-2008: Important in 2008despite many controls!prejudicecontrols
    • Figure 2. The Effect of Prejudice on VoteChoice, by Election Year: Onlysignificant in 2008
    • The Predicted Probability of Voting forObama, by Prejudice. More prejudice, lesslikely to vote for Obama
    • The Impact of Prejudice onAffect toward 2008 Democrats:Only affects ratings of Obama
    • Distribution of negative racialstereotypes: not big differences by Party ID(many Dems with negative stereotypes)
    • The Effect of Prejudice on the Probability ofVoting for Obama, by PartyPrejudice more important for Democrats andIndependents because..?
    •  Racial Prejudice and the “New South” Reasons to question convergence thesis Need for an unobtrusive measure of prejudice Bogus pipeline: lab experiment Survey measure?Kuklinski&Cobb’sListExperiment,1992,1995.
    • Convergence with traditional measures:Comparing regional differences in approval of blacks owninghouses in white suburbs using traditional survey question
    • Comparing regional differences in approvalof blacks owning houses in white suburbsusing traditional survey question
    • The List ExperimentI’m going to read you a list of things that sometimes make people angry. Please tellme how many of these things make you angry. Remember, you are not saying how youfeel about any of these things individually, just give me the total number of themoverall that make you angry.List that 1st random half ofrespondents hearsList that 2nd random half hears the federal governmentincreasing the tax on gasoline professional athletes gettingmillion-dollar salaries large corporations polluting theenvironment the federal governmentincreasing the tax on gasoline professional athletes gettingmillion-dollar salaries large corporations pollutingthe environment **a black family moving innext door (1991)OR **black teenagers datingwhite teenagers (1994)
    • Results of list experiment
    •  Percentage of whites angry at single black familymoving next door Non-South: 10% South: 42% Southern females: 4% Southern males: 78% Percentage of whites angry at black teenagersdating white teenagers Non-South: South: 63%Results of list experiment
    •  Is this a measure of racial prejudice? Why are southern males more hostile, angry?Questions