Social cognition Explanations of Prejudice

Learning Objectives To understand what psychologists mean by the term prejudice. To know and understand 3 theories of prejudice. To evaluate 3 theories of prejudice.

Three Explanations of prejudice Competition for resources (Sherif). Social Identity theory (Tajfel). Authoritarian personality (Adorno).

Starter In pairs can you define the term prejudice? What do you think the difference is between prejudice and discrimination? Can you think of any reasons why people display prejudiced attitudes?

Definitions Prejudice – an unjustified or incorrect attitude (positive or negative) towards an individual based solely on the individual’s membership or a group. Discrimination – Behaviour or actions (positive or negative) towards an individual or a group of people.

Prejudice Most research has focussed on the negative attitudes and behaviours since these are often a source of conflict in society. It is often assumed that there is a direct link between prejudice and discrimination, however, this is not always the case.

Categories of Prejudice One of the most common forms of prejudice is racism. Can you identify 2 other forms of prejudice?

Categories of prejudice Sexism – e.g. A woman’s place is in the home. Ageism – e.g. Not employing older people for jobs they could do. Homophobism – e.g. Refusing to serve a homosexual or lesbian couple in a public house.

Realistic conflict theory Prejudice is caused by social processes occurring between groups of people Prejudice causes changes in individual thinking (e.g. stereotyping) but these are strongly linked to group processes psychlotron.org.uk

Theories of Prejudice Competition for resource (Summary)

Competition for Resources - Sherif Prejudice arises when two or more social groups compete for the same scarce/valued resource Inbuilt tendency to favour in-group members; become hostile toward out-group members Deny resources to out-group thereby ensuring greater share for in-group/self

Competition for Resources Sherif et al (1961): the ‘Robber’s Cave’ study Competition & conflict artificially stimulated between two groups of boys at a summer camp Resulted in negative stereotyping of out-group; hostile and aggressive acts toward out-group members Prejudice persisted even after competition ended TASK: Read through the study and answer the questions that follow.

Competition for Resources Questions over the validity of the Robber’s Cave study: Unrepresentative samples (US American boys; limited numbers)? Contrived & artificial situation? Competition does not always create prejudice (e.g. Tyerman & Spencer’s study with UK scouts)

Competition for Resources - Evaluation Predicts that prejudice should intensify during times of economic hardship. This confirmed many times: Dollard (1938) prejudice against German immigrants in US town increased as jobs grew scarce Jacobs & Landau (1971) US prejudice against Chinese increased & decreased in line with prosperity & competition

Competition for Resources - Evaluation Competition certainly increases prejudice. However: Prejudice can exist in the absence of competition (e.g. apartheid South Africa) Competition does not automatically lead to prejudice; it depends on the nature & relationship of the groups involved (Tyerman & Spencer, 1983)

Evaluation Task Read through the evaluative point on your handout and identify whether it is a strength or limitation of the theory.

Theories of Prejudice Social Identity Theory (Summary)

Social identity theory Prejudice is caused by social processes occurring between groups of people It happens because of the way our sense of self (identity) is determined by the groups we belong to

Social identity theory We derive our identity in part from the social groups we belong to (culture, religion, profession, football team…) Consequently, we feel better about ourselves when we feel good about our social groups We get to feel good about our social groups by comparing them favourably with other groups

Social identity theory Prejudice is a strategy for achieving & maintaining self-esteem: We will tend to be biased towards in-group members and against out-group members We will pay more attention to criteria that make our in-groups look better than the out-group

Social identity theory Tajfel et al (1982) assigned schoolboys to ‘meaningless’ groups; allowed them to allocate points/money to own & other group PPs always chose a strategy that would allocate less to other group than to own even when this meant getting less overall for their own group Shows in-group bias in the absence of competition & with only a ‘minimal group’

Social identity theory Favouritism towards in-group: Levine et al (2005) – Man-U & Liverpool fans more likely to help an injured person if wearing own team’s colours Football fans – self-esteem linked to team performance; tendency to denigrate other teams/fans (esp. if local); tendency to emphasise other ways of being superior if team doing poorly (e.g. ‘Chelsea fans are glory hunters, not real fans’ etc.)

Social identity theory Plenty of support for main propositions. Two main problems: Tendency to favour in-group may be culturally specific, not universal (Wetherall, 1982) Most studies show bias towards in-group – not necessarily the same thing as prejudice

Theories of Prejudice Authoritarian Personality (summary)

Authoritarian personality Prejudice is caused by psychological processes within the individual Prejudiced people have a particular personality type

Authoritarian personality Personality traits: Status oriented Conventional and conformist Suspicious & hostile Caused by: Harsh and punitive upbringing resulting in repressed hostility towards parents – this is displaced onto ‘inferior’ people

Authoritarian personality Adorno et al (1950) Developed attitude scales to measure authoritarianism (F-Scale), anti-Semitism & ethnocentrism Found significant +ve correlations: F-Scale w/anti-Semitism: +0.8 F-Scale w/ethnocentrism: Shows strong relationship between authoritarianism & prejudice

Authoritarian personality Problems with Adorno et al’s research: F-Scale consisted only of positive items – response bias? Theory developed using projective attitude measures – researcher bias? Correlation does not prove causation – authoritarianism & prejudice may occur together, but it doesn’t follow that one causes the other

Authoritarian personality Problems with the theory: Prejudice within a society can change very quickly – e.g. Germany in 1930s, US following Pearl Harbor – not consistent with Adorno’s idea that prejudice always goes back to childhood. Cannot easily account for prejudice affecting large groups/whole societies e.g. South Africa under apartheid