DOCSLIB.ORG

Prejudice and Intergroup Relations 14 Thomas Kessler and Amélie Mummendey

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Prejudice and Intergroup Relations 14 Thomas Kessler and Amélie Mummendey 9781405124003_4_014.qxd 10/31/07 3:14 PM Page 290 Prejudice and Intergroup Relations 14 Thomas Kessler and Amélie Mummendey KEY CONCEPTS authoritarian personality category salience common ingroup identity contact hypothesis decategorization ethnocentrism ingroup favouritism intergroup anxiety intergroup behaviour minimal group paradigm mutual distinctiveness positive and negative interdependence positive distinctiveness prejudice reverse discrimination social categorization social discrimination social dominance orientation superordinate goals tokenism 9781405124003_4_014.qxd 10/31/07 3:14 PM Page 291 CHAPTER OUTLINE This chapter introduces prejudice and social discrimination together with explanations of their causes. After a brief discussion of prejudice at the level of the individual, the chapter focuses mainly on prejudice and social discrimination as intergroup phenomena. We present classic and con- temporary intergroup explanations of intergroup conflict such as realistic conflict theory and social identity theory. Furthermore, we introduce basic psychological processes such as social categorization, identification with a social group, group evaluation and group-based emotions, and consider the intergroup motivations regulating intergroup behaviour. The remainder of the chapter presents various approaches explaining when and how prejudice and intergroup conflict can be reduced. Introduction As in most parts of the modern world, social and economic change in Europe is currently charac- terized by an internationalization of all domains of life. Consequently, countries are forced to deal with a permanent and increasing flow of migration of people with different cultural, religious or ethnic backgrounds. We find ourselves confronted with people who appear to be different from us. Obviously, societal changes such as migration are not the only way in which different others are introduced into our social contexts. We are already used to differentiating between people on the basis of gender, sexual orientation or nationality. These ‘others’ enter into various areas of our lives. We have to deal with those who are dif- ferent from us. We form impressions and judgements about what sort of people they are, and we experience feelings and emotions towards them: ‘Catholics are bigots; Protestants are uptight.’ ‘Women are born to support and maintain the family, they’re not cut out for top management positions.’ ‘Men are not really competent to rear children.’ ‘Homosexuals should not be par- ents and cannot raise children in an appropriate way.’ ‘East Germans are always complaining; they are incompetent.’ ‘West Germans are arrogant and cold.’ ‘Muslims are conservative and sexist; they threaten the fundamental values of modern Europe.’ What information do we gain from this list of impressions and judgements? Firstly, in all examples, the content of judgement is connected with negative feelings. Secondly, our behaviour towards these groups of people tends to be in line with our judgements and emotions. Given the above statements, female applicants are unlikely to be shortlisted for senior managerial positions. Turkish families are also unlikely to be openly welcomed into new neighbourhoods. Thirdly, our judgements, emotions and behaviours obviously apply to both social groups as a whole and to individual members of the particular group. We approach these ‘others’ in a generalized way and neglect interindividual differences. 9781405124003_4_014.qxd 10/31/07 3:14 PM Page 292 292 CHAPTER 14 PREJUDICE AND INTERGROUP RELATIONS An integration of the individual aspects listed above leads us take the form of underprivilege, disadvantage, social exclusion, to a more comprehensive picture, and ultimately to the concepts maltreatment or even physical extermination (in its most extreme of prejudice and discrimination. Although both prejudice and forms, ‘ethnic cleansing’ and genocide). In everyday life, these discrimination can, in principle, occur in positive forms, the forms of overt and blatantly negative treatment are, however, less literature on intergroup relations (and hence this chapter) focuses frequent than more subtle forms such as tokenism or reverse on their negative forms. Pre- discrimination. judice can be defined as an anti- Tokenism involves con- prejudice a derogatory attitude or pathy, or a derogatory social ceding a minor favour to a tokenism conceding a minor favour to a antipathy towards particular social groups social minority in order to justify negative or their members attitude, towards particular minority in order to justify discrimination on a broader scale social groups or their mem- negative discrimination on a social discrimination negative, disadvantaging or derogatory behaviour bers, combined with the feel- broader scale. For example, towards a social group or its members ing and expression of negative employers hiring a woman or a black person on the basis of their affect. Social discrimination gender or race, and not their individual competence, can use this refers to the explicit display of ‘token minority’ to demonstrate that they do not discriminate negative or disadvantaging behaviour towards particular social against minorities, and that there is no need for more fundamental groups or their members (Allport, 1954b; Brown, 1995; Hewstone, changes in equal opportunity policy (see Pettigrew & Martin, 1987). Rubin & Willis, 2002). Sometimes, prejudiced individuals act against their prejudice The selection of social groups appearing in the statements and show reverse discrimination: they systematically evaluate above consists of groups who are often made a target of prejudice. or treat members of a target Groups defined in terms of religious beliefs, gender, sexual orien- group more favourably than reverse discrimination systematically tation and ethnicity prove to be chronic victims of prejudice. This non-members (e.g., Dutton & more positive evaluation or treatment may be due to the fact that these groups are all formed on the basis Lake, 1973). For those indi- of members of a target outgroup than of categories which are meaningful for defining the self and for dif- viduals engaging in reverse members of one’s own group, which can ferentiating between the self and others in many social contexts. discrimination, such subtle have negative effects on the self-esteem of members of the outgroup Prejudice is often expressed in various forms of discrimination forms of discrimination offer against the target group or any of its members. Discrimination can protection against public ac- cusations of bias in a society where prejudice may be deemed unacceptable. For the targets of reverse discrimination, however, it is not only extremely blatant forms of discrimination but also the more subtle forms that pose a problem. They may experience detrimental effects to their self-esteem and self-worth and inter- nalize negative evaluations and low expectations of their own competence, because they attribute positive feedback and success to their category membership rather than to their personal merits. SUMMARY Prejudice consists of a derogatory attitude towards social groups or their members. Social discrimination is the beha- vioural manifestation of prejudice ranging from explicit neg- Plate 14.1 Hiring a woman can be a way for an employer to ative treatment of others based on their group membership use a ‘token minority’ to demonstrate that he does not to tokenism and reverse discrimination. discriminate. 9781405124003_4_014.qxd 10/31/07 3:14 PM Page 293 EXPLANATIONS OF PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION 293 from a particular style of socialization in families, with authoritarian EXPLANATIONS OF repressive parents using extremely harsh punishments to discipline their children into strict conformity with conventional norms. PREJUDICE AND As a result the children are subject to conflicting tendencies of admiration and aggression towards their parents. The children do DISCRIMINATION not, however, dare to act upon their hostile impulses towards the parental authorities. Instead, the children’s negative feelings and aggressive tendencies are displaced and directed at ‘scapegoats’; Do personality factors contribute to prejudice and intergroup conflict? these are groups which deviate from prevalent societal conven- How does the relationship between ingroup and outgroup influence tions, for example social minorities, against whom derogation and attitudes and behaviours of group members? even aggression are socially sanctioned. What are the minimal conditions for intergroup conflict to develop? Based on these theoretical assumptions, Adorno and colleagues How do group members manage their social identity? developed a personality inventory to assess the various dimensions of the authoritarian personality. These dimensions included: The destructive consequences of extremely negative forms of pre- attitudes towards minorities (e.g., anti-Semitism); admiration for judice and discrimination such as devaluation, hostile aggression, authorities; political and economic conservatism; and a cognitive dehumanization and even genocide lead us to ask why people are style of thinking, whereby the world is simply divided into good prejudiced and how social discrimination can be explained. Whilst and bad. The central scale within this inventory is the well known prejudice and discrimination are widespread phenomena, not all Fascism scale (F-scale) measuring the potential for fascism and individuals express prejudiced views in the same way and to the distinguishing
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Social Norms and Social Influence Mcdonald and Crandall 149
    Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect Social norms and social influence Rachel I McDonald and Christian S Crandall Psychology has a long history of demonstrating the power and and their imitation is not enough to implicate social reach of social norms; they can hardly be overestimated. To norms. Imitation is common enough in many forms of demonstrate their enduring influence on a broad range of social life — what creates the foundation for culture and society phenomena, we describe two fields where research continues is not the imitation, but the expectation of others for when to highlight the power of social norms: prejudice and energy imitation is appropriate, and when it is not. use. The prejudices that people report map almost perfectly onto what is socially appropriate, likewise, people adjust their A social norm is an expectation about appropriate behav- energy use to be more in line with their neighbors. We review ior that occurs in a group context. Sherif and Sherif [8] say new approaches examining the effects of norms stemming that social norms are ‘formed in group situations and from multiple groups, and utilizing normative referents to shift subsequently serve as standards for the individual’s per- behaviors in social networks. Though the focus of less research ception and judgment when he [sic] is not in the group in recent years, our review highlights the fundamental influence situation. The individual’s major social attitudes are of social norms on social behavior. formed in relation to group norms (pp. 202–203).’ Social norms, or group norms, are ‘regularities in attitudes and Address behavior that characterize a social group and differentiate Department of Psychology, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, it from other social groups’ [9 ] (p.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Psychology of Violence
    Social Psychology of Violence From "Encyclopedia of Violence, Peace and Conflict" Situational, Cognitive, and Systemic Sources of Violence Three Kinds of Violence: Episodic, Structural, and Cultural Analysis of Conflict and Violence at Multiple Levels Social Psychology of Peace-making Social Psychology of Structural and Cultural Violence Peace Psychology: The Pursuit of Peace-building Further Reading Glossary Enemy Images Exaggerated representations of the ‘other’ as thoroughly diabolical, aggressive, and untrustworthy. Dehumanization The mental process of stripping away the human qualities of the other. Fundamental Attribution Error The tendency to perceive the bad behavior of out-group members to bad character and to perceive the bad behavior of in-group members to situational factors. Structural Violence Indirect violence through social injustice, inequity, and failure to meet basic human needs for items such as food and shelter. Superordinate Goals Goals that lie within the interests of each group in a conflict but that can be attained only through intergroup cooperation, which reduces tensions and destructive conflict. Social psychology examines the psychological influence of people on people. Although violence such as the mass killing at Virginia Tech in April 2007 by a lone gunman is often seen as individual aggression, social psychology analyzes such acts through the lens of social and situational influences. Situational, Cognitive, and Systemic Sources of Violence Following World War II, psychological analyses of violence often emphasized personality variables, such as the degree to which people are receptive to prejudice or have a tendency to endorse authoritarian beliefs. This emphasis arose as an effort to understand the rise of fascism in Europe and later, the problem of race relations in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Stereotypes and Prejudice
    Stereotypes and Prejudice Their Overt and Subtle Influence in the Classroom CONNIE T. WOLFE University of Michigan STEVEN J. SPENCER Hope College The authors examine overt and subtle forms of stereotyping and prejudice. Two theories that explain overt prejudice are reviewed: realistic conflict theory and social identity theory. Although overt prejudice seems to have declined, subtle stereotyping is still pervasive. The authors review one theory, aversive racism theory, that explains this phenomenon. They also discuss two perspectives, attributional ambiguity and stereotype threat, which provide accounts of the impact of subtle racism. Both overt and subtle prejudice present challenges for the classroom. The authors describe one intervention called the jigsaw classroom that encourages work toward common goals and helps reduce the expression and impact of overt discrimination. A second intervention program, wise schooling, is presented, which aims to reduce the impact of subtle stereotypes by reducing stereotype threat. Why do prejudice and discrimination exist? Has overt racism been replaced by more subtle forms of prejudice? How does stereotyping affect its targets? In this article we describe two theories, realistic conflict theory and social identity theory, which provide an answer to the first question. We address the second question by noting that although overt discrimination has decreased, subtle forms of prejudice are still quite common and we describe one theory, aversive racism, that provides a compelling account of this change in the expression of prejudice. Finally, we answer the third question by describing two phenomena, attributional ambiguity and stereotype threat, that result from the pervasive nature of subtle stereotyping. This article is a selective overview of what social psychology has to say about these crucial issues.
    [Show full text]
  • The Psychology of Cultural Contact
    1 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CULTURAL CONTACT Deborah A. Prentice and Dale T. Miller thnic diversity currently preoccupies a sizable segment of U.S. society, from employers and school administrators, who must E manage diversity within institutional settings, to politicians and social scientists, who must formulate policies for addressing the com- peting claims of different ethnic groups. The issue of diversity is fraught with anxiety. Ethnic conflicts in many countries around the world attest to the potential for relations across cultural boundaries to go seriously and destructively awry. Moreover, Americans' own struggles with race have left many pessimistic about the prospects for achieving positive, stable relations between ethnic groups. With new waves of immigrants coming from Asia and Latin America and higher birth rates among mi- nority than majority groups, the U.S. population is becoming, and will continue to become, ethnically and culturally more diverse. Thus, how to promote positive relations across group boundaries is a question of paramount importance. Thirty or forty years ago, psychologists thought they had an answer to this question. The contact hypothesis posited that if members of dif- ferent ethnic groups interact with each other on an equal-status basis in pursuit of common goals, positive intergroup relations will result (Allport 1954). This hypothesis was so appealing that it spawned hun- dreds of studies designed to test and refine its claims. The results have been less than encouraging. Yes, equal-status contact can have positive results, but only if many conditions obtain: the contact should be mean- ingful and have the potential to extend beyond the immediate situation; the individuals should be as similar as possible on all dimensions be- sides group membership; the contact should be voluntary, extended in duration, and varied across contexts; and so on (for a more complete list, see Stephan 1985).
    [Show full text]
  • Syllabus Theories Intergroup Relations
    Theories of Intergroup Relations 1 Psychology 9234 Fall, 2015 Theories of Intergroup Relations Fatih Uenal, Room A-12 Time: Tue 16:00-18:00 Room: 271 Dragos Kampüsü Office hours: by appointment Email: [email protected] Substance: This course includes an introduction to and comparison of most extant theories of intergroup relations: those theories that explain how human groups form and relate to one another. It may be of relevance to students in psychology, sociology, political science, communications, history, anthropology, economics, or to anyone interested in group conflict, diplomacy, oppression, discrimination, society, or culture. One of the major questions we will consider is whether different kinds of theories are required to explain intergroup relations based on different kinds of group definitions, including nationality (the nation-state), gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and class. We will also consider the type of phenomena and level of analysis each theory addresses, that is, whether theories concern mainly the psychological state of an individual, the social-cultural context, the social-structural context, the economics of social arrangements, collective behavior, institutionalized patterns, and so forth. Because of the theoretical abstractness of some of the works, I have also provided a “concrete” reading dealing with each topic for each subject (e.g., works of autobiography, fiction, commentary, history, etc.). Such readings are indented on the reading list below. Original readings and important writers are emphasized in the readings selected, but research concerning elaborating on each theory will also be read. Objectives: Students will learn to recognize the level of analysis theories use, the kind of process or mechanisms they prescribe, the family of theories to which the theory belongs, as well as the basic tenets and assumptions of each theory.
    [Show full text]
  • Intergroup Dialogue in Higher Education: Definition, Origins, and Practices
    Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) • DOI: 10.1002/aehe.3204 Intergroup Dialogue in Higher Education: Definition, Origins, and Practices NTERGROUP DIALOGUE IS AN INNOVATIVE PRACTICE IN Ihigher education that promotes student engagement across cultural and social divides, fostering learning about social diversity and inequali- ties and cultivating an ethos of social responsibility. This approach to diver- sity education on college and university campuses responds to a growing need for educational practices that prepares students to live, work, and lead in a complex, diverse, and stratified society (Banks, 2002; Chesler, Lewis, and Crowfoot, 2005; Guarasci and Cornwell, 1997; Gurin, 1999; hooks, 1994; Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pedersen, and Allen, 1999; Sleeter and McLaren, 1995; Stephan and Stephan, 2001; Schoem, Frankel, Zúñiga, and Lewis, 1993; Tatum, 1997). Intergroup dialogue (IGD), the focus of this monograph, is one of several dialogue and deliberation practices currently being used on college and uni- versity campuses in the United States. Many of these practices seek to foster conversation about contentious issues in collaborative ways (Schoem and others, 2001; Zúñiga and Nagda, 2001). One model, Study Circles (Flavin-McDonald and Barrett, 1999; McCoy and Sherman, 1994; McCoy and McCormick, 2001), emphasizes community building and social action. Study Circles bring community members together in small groups to build rela- tionships, deliberate about community issues, and explore actions to effect change in their communities (also see http://www.studycircles.org). Another model, Sustained Dialogue (Parker, 2006; Saunders, 1999, 2003), draws from work in international conflict resolution and peace building. In Sustained Dialogue, stu- dents of diverse backgrounds come together to build mutual respect, identify Intergroup Dialogue in Higher Education 1 issues of conflict, and generate action plans, including workable agreements to conflicts or disputes (also see http://www.sustaineddialogue.org).
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Intergroup Bias: Perceptions and Attitudes in Rhesus Macaques
    ATTITUDES AND SOCIAL COGNITION The Evolution of Intergroup Bias: Perceptions and Attitudes in Rhesus Macaques Neha Mahajan, Margaret A. Martinez, and Gil Diesendruck Natashya L. Gutierrez Bar-Ilan University Yale University Mahzarin R. Banaji Laurie R. Santos Harvard University Yale University Social psychologists have learned a great deal about the nature of intergroup conflict and the attitudinal and cognitive processes that enable it. Less is known about where these processes come from in the first place. In particular, do our strategies for dealing with other groups emerge in the absence of human-specific experi- ences? One profitable way to answer this question has involved administering tests that are conceptual equivalents of those used with adult humans in other species, thereby exploring the continuity or discontinuity of psychological processes. We examined intergroup preferences in a nonhuman species, the rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta). We found the first evidence that a nonhuman species automatically distinguishes the faces of members of its own social group from those in other groups and displays greater vigilance toward outgroup members (Experiments 1–3). In addition, we observed that macaques spontaneously associate novel objects with specific social groups and display greater vigilance to objects associated with outgroup members (Experiments 4–5). Finally, we developed a looking time procedure—the Looking Time Implicit Association Test, which resembles the Implicit Association Test (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995)—and we discovered that macaques, like humans, automatically evaluate ingroup members positively and outgroup members negatively (Experiments 6–7). These field studies represent the first controlled experiments to examine the presence of intergroup attitudes in a nonhuman species.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study Among Turkish-Dutch Muslims Maykel Verkuyten
    Religious Group Identification and Inter-Religious Relations: A Study Among Turkish-Dutch Muslims Maykel Verkuyten To cite this version: Maykel Verkuyten. Religious Group Identification and Inter-Religious Relations: A Study Among Turkish-Dutch Muslims. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, SAGE Publications, 2007, 10 (3), pp.341-357. 10.1177/1368430207078695. hal-00571655 HAL Id: hal-00571655 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00571655 Submitted on 1 Mar 2011 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 2007 Vol 10(3) 341–357 Religious Group Identifi cation and Inter-Religious Relations: A Study Among Turkish-Dutch Muslims Maykel Verkuyten Utrecht University Following social identity theory, this research examines the relationship between group identifi cation and intergroup relations by focusing on religion. Religious as well as Dutch national group identifi cation was examined among Turkish-Dutch Muslims. Identifi cation was studied in relation to general affective ratings of multiple religious groups (Muslims, Christians, Hindustanis, Jews and non-believers) and the endorsement of Islamic group rights. The results show that Muslim identifi cation was more like a nominal (high or ‘total’ identifi cation) than a continuous variable, and that many participants showed low identifi cation with the national group.
    [Show full text]
  • Theories on Intergroup Relations and Emotions: a Theoretical Overview1
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Psychologica Theories on intergroup relations and emotions: A theoretical overview 7 Theories on intergroup relations and emotions: A theoretical overview • pág. 7-33 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14195/1647-8606_57­‑2_1 Theories on intergroup relations and emotions: A theoretical overview1 Ana Figueiredo2, Joaquim Pires Valentim3 and Bertjan Doosje4 Abstract The present manuscript is a theoretical revision of the major theories about intergroup relations and emotions, developed over the last decades in the field of social psychol- ogy. Following a general chronological order, we first revise the first individualistic approaches to the field of intergroup relations and social conflict. Afterwards, we revise the realistic group conflict theory and relative deprivation theory. Next, we discuss the social identity and the self-categorization theories and highlight some of the most studied dimensions of intergroup relations within this framework. To conclude, we present some of the most influential appraisal theories of emotions and the theory of intergroup emotions. We claim for an integration of several different approaches when studying intergroup relations and, more specifically, the role of different emotions in explaining instances of intergroup conflict. Keywords: theoretical revision; social identity; intergroup relations; emotions 1 This work was supported by a PhD grant from the Foundation for Science and Technology, Portugal [grant number SFRH / BD / 36056 / 2007]. 2 University of Coimbra. Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences.Email:[email protected] 3 University of Coimbra. Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences. Email: [email protected] 4 University of Amsterdam.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution and Future of Diversity at Work
    Journal of Applied Psychology © 2017 American Psychological Association 2017, Vol. 102, No. 3, 483–499 0021-9010/17/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000161 The Evolution and Future of Diversity at Work Quinetta Roberson Ann Marie Ryan Villanova University Michigan State University Belle Rose Ragins University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee This article examines the evolution of diversity in the Journal of Applied Psychology. To begin, we explore foundations of the concept of diversity, including its appearance in both applied contexts and the scholarly literature. We then review the literature on diversity, including the development of its conceptualization and operationalizations over time, in the Journal and in the field of applied psycho- logical science at large. We also examine the processes underlying the effects of diversity, and specific outcomes of diversity in organizations. To conclude, we offer a future research agenda that highlights diversity-related topics and issues important for advancing an understanding of diversity and moving the field forward, especially within the Journal. This work makes several contributions to research on diversity in organizations. First, we provide a lens for examining change in the study of diversity over time as well as a critical examination of the benefits and challenges associated with these changes. Second, we review the underlying mechanisms and key contextual influences on diversity effects in organizations. Third, our review examines the explanatory power of current diversity research and then uses this to develop a research agenda. By organizing the broad body of literature that exists on diversity, our article offers a sharp picture of what gaps in knowledge exist and where future research should focus.
    [Show full text]
  • Theories of Intergroup Relations References
    Theories of Intergroup Relations References • Tajfel, H., and J. Turner: The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior, The Psychology of Intergroup Relations, ed. S. Worchel and W. Austin, Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall: (1986) 7-24. • Ioannou, C., A. Rustichini and S. Qi: Group Payoffs as Public Signals, Journal of Economic Psychology, 48 (2015), 89-105. Christos A. Ioannou 2/25 Terms • In-group: The social group to which an individual perceives herself or himself as belonging. • Out-group: Any group other than the one to which individuals perceive themselves as belonging. Christos A. Ioannou 3/25 Authoritarian Personality Theory Authoritarian personality is a state of mind or attitude characterized by belief in absolute obedience or submission to someone else's authority, as well as the administration of that belief through the oppression of one's subordinates. It usually applies to individuals who are known or viewed as having an authoritarian, strict, or oppressive personality towards subordinates. The theory consists of three components. 1 Authoritarian submission: A high degree of submission to authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives. 2 Authoritarian aggression: A general aggressiveness, directed against various persons, that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities. Christos A. Ioannou 3 Conventionalism: A high degree of adherence to the 4/25 social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities. Authoritarian Personality Theory (Cont.) 3 Conventionalism: A high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities.
    [Show full text]
  • PREJUDICE and International Education
    PREJUDICE and International Education Conrad Hughes PREJUDICE and International Education 1. Whatisit? 2. Theories of the way prejudice develops 3. Can it be measured? 4. Schools and prejudice 5. International education and prejudice 6. How can prejudice be reduced? 1. What is it? praejudicium – “precedent” strong generalisation rationalises “beliefs held on irrational grounds [to protect ] a deep-seated system of emotions” (Thouless, 1930, p. 150) “will to misunderstand” (Shi-Xu, 2001, p. 281) Fixed mind-set Tends to be self-gratifying 2. Theories of the way prejudice develops Psychoanalytical Frustration aggression theory Dollard et al. (1939) Hovland & Sears (1940) Emotional maladjustment Adorno et al. (1950) Relative deprivation Runciman (1966) Realistic conflict theory Sherif et al. (1954) Vivian & Brown (1995) 2. Theories of the way prejudice develops Developmental Psychology “the child’s discovery of his homeland and understanding of other countries is a process of transition from egocentricity to reciprocity” Piaget & Weil (1951) Allport’s 3 stage theory of prejudice formation (1954) Pregeneralization (middle childhood) : children are generally aware of differences but do not categorize others or have strong feelings toward other groups. Early puberty : total rejection of outgroups peaks. Frenkel-Brunswick, 1948; Radke & Stage three (late adolescence) : adolescent’s Sutherland, 1949; Remy, Nathan, thinking becomes more differentiated and less Becker & Torney, 1975; Aboud, generalized. 1988; Doyle & Boud,1995; Aboud & Amato, 2001; Cushner, 2008 2. Theories of the way prejudice develops Social psychology/Sociological Belief Congruence Theory Rokeach (1960, 1971) Black Skin White Masks Frantz Fanon (1952) Social Reflection Bandura (1977) Social Identity Theory Tajfel & Turner (1986) 3. Can it be measured? Implicit Association Test Greenwald, Banaji, Nosek(1998) Clark & Clark Doll Task (1954) (Trait Attribution) The Robbers Cave Experiment Sherif et al.
    [Show full text]