1. Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination
Social Psychology
Chapter 5
September 17, 2004
Class #4

3. He fit the description…
Case Study:
February 4, 1999 – Amadou Diallo, 22, died in a hail of 41 bullets outside his Bronx apartment in what the officers testified was a tragic error

4. Stereotypes and Prejudices
The generalized perceptions, beliefs, and expectations a person has about members in some group
Schemas about entire groups of people
Effects of stereotypes on behavior can be automatic and unconscious
Prejudice
A negative attitude toward an individual based solely on the person’s membership is some group
Includes an irrational hostility toward a particular race or group
In one word…prejudgment
Discrimination
Differential treatment of individuals who belong to different groups

5. Stereotype Generalized belief about members of a group
Stereotypes about racial, ethnic, gender, or sexual orientation groups are schemas. 
Generalized belief about members of a group
May or may not be accurate
Most researchers believe it is even possible to have a schema that you don't personally believe (OTHER PEOPLE think that Group x has qualities y... but I don't)…
Lets try this:
What are the characteristics of:
A typical New Yorker?
A typical Californian?
A typical white male?
A typical “career woman”
A typical “stay-at-home” mom

6. How Stereotypes Form: Social Categorization
The classification of persons into groups on the basis of common attributes.
Helps us form impressions quickly and use past experiences to guide new interactions.
Serious drawback: By categorizing people, we often:
Overestimate the differences between groups
Underestimate the differences within groups
Can bias our perceptions

7. Stone et al. (1997) Radio broadcast played to participants
They are shown a “photograph” of the player to be analyzed
Participants rated the player better if they thought he was black

8. How Stereotypes Form: In-groups vs. Out-groups
Strong tendency to divide people into ingroups and outgroups
Such group identifications can promote an ingroup bias…
Often it becomes an “Us vs. Them” attitude
Consequences
Exaggerate differences between ingroups and other outgroups.
Outgroup homogeneity effect

9. Perceived Outgroup Homogeneity
Phenomenon of overestimating the extent to which members within other groups are similar to each other
Example: “They all look the same to me”

10. How Stereotypes Form: Maybe they become automatic…
Devine (1989)
Suggests that our parents and media may have started an early process that has now become automatic

11. Racial Bias Study: Sagar & Schofield (1980)
Purpose:
Demonstrate that stereotypes bias interpretation of ambiguous events
Participants:
40 African American; 40 White
Procedures:
Participants presented with four ambiguous drawings:
Bumping
Requesting food
Poking
Taking a pencil

12. Sagar & Schofield (1980)
Participants were to rate actor’s behavior as.....
Mean
Threatening
Playful
Friendly

13. Sagar & Schofield (1980): Experimental Set-Up
Actor Race
African American
White
Participant Race

14. Sagar & Schofield (1980): Results
Subject Actor Mean & Threatening
White W AA
African W
American AA
Conclusion: White and African American participants rated identical behavior as more mean and threatening when actor was African American. Schemas influence the interpretation of events.

15. Who has the razor??? Allport and Postman's (1947)
Subjects were shown a picture depicting two men, one black and one white, confronting each other on a subway car
The white man has a straight razor in his hand
After viewing the picture, the first subject describes it to a second subject, who in turn describes it to another, and so on
After a few retellings, the straight razor ends up (is inferred to be) in the hand of the black man

16. Interesting replication…
Boon & Davies (1987)
Subjects see a cartoon story of 2 men interacting on the subway.  At the end of the interaction, one man pulls a knife.
Different subjects see one of three different versions:
1) Both men are white: 
Man A has the knife (wearing a suit)    
2) Both men are white: 
Man B has the knife (wearing work clothes)    
3) One is black, one is white: 
White man has the knife

17. Boon & Davies (1987) Retrieval phase Both recall and recognition tests
Recall test: 
No stimuli, just "describe the man who pulled the knife“
Recognition test: 
See two versions of the critical picture (correct knife-holder, or knife in the OTHER man's hand): instructions are "pick the one you saw before“
There is a correct and an incorrect version for the participants who saw the original story with two white men, AND also for those participants who saw the original story with one white man and one black man

18. Results???
What do you think happened???
Explanations???

19. Can stereotypes actually create self-fulfilling prophecies???
Wood et al. (1974)
White male University students interviewed white and black male high school students seeking employment
White interviewers of black applicants (relative to white interviewers of white applicants)
Sat further away
Conducted shorter interviews
Made more speech errors
Appeared to cause black applicants to become uncomfortable
Follow-up Experiment
While males were applicants
Treated like black applicants were treated in the first experiment
They performed similarly (to black applicants in exp. 1) during the interview

20. Three Levels of Stereotypes
Public
What we say to others about a group
Private
what we consciously think about a group, but don’t say to others
Implicit
unconscious mental associations guiding our judgments and actions without our conscious awareness
Public stereotypes have decreased in North America recently (“political correctness”)

21. Well, there are exceptions…
“The biggest thing I don't like about New York are the foreigners”

22. Explicit versus Implicit Prejudice
If you were asked your opinions about Irishmen, Californians, or fraternity men, that would tap:
Explicit prejudice – positive or negative feelings of which you are aware
But not implicit prejudice – feelings of which you are not aware

23. Intergroup Competition
Sherif (1961): The Robbers Cave Experiment
Two groups of eleven year-old boys were sent to a remote summer camp in Robbers Cave State Park (Oklahoma)
Initially unaware of their fragile co-existence, they formed tribalistic bonds, and having a great time…and then…
These middle class boys placed into competing areas in a summer camp:
They competed for medals and attention

24. Competed in a variety of contests…

25. Soon the rivalry became violent…
Raided one another’s cabins
Stole and burned one another’s flags
Came to view one another as “stinkers” “smart-alecks” and “sneaks”
Verbal prejudice became apparent, spiraling downward towards aggressive territorial violence
The groups eventually had to be separated

26. So how did experimenters try to reduce the prejudice they had created???
Propaganda: No
Positive propaganda about one group directed to the other by the experimenters did not help
Contact: No
Doing non-competitive activities together (e.g., watching movies) did not help
Cooperative action: Yes
Experimenters arranged for camp truck to break down
Both groups needed to pull it uphill
Intergroup friendships began to develop

27. Realistic Conflict Theory
Proposal that intergroup conflict, and negative prejudices and stereotypes, emerge out of actual competition between groups for desired resources
Example: Members of different ethnic groups may compete for the same jobs, or the same farmland

28. Realistic Conflict Theory
Competition for valuable but limited resources breeds hostility…
Loser: becomes frustrated
Winner: becomes threatened
Result: Much conflict
Example: Women and immigrants joining the workforce
When conflict arises there is a higher tendency to rely on stereotypes…”they’re all the same”

29. SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY
Rubin & Hewstone (1998)
Comparing our ingroups with outgroups that are less well off can raise our self-esteem
We desire to feel good about ourselves
Part of our identity comes from the groups to which we belong

30. Discrimination
Behaviors directed toward people on the basis of their group membership
Unfair treatment

31. History Repeats Itself
Who is more likely to get harassed at the airport security check?

32. Who is more likely to get harassed at an airport security check???
Note: Several of the previous slides were prepared by the following website:

33. Discrimination
Do you know anyone who has, because of their membership in a group, been:
Denied a job or promotion?
Insulted or harassed?
Ignored or poorly served in a restaurant or other business?
Denied an apartment or house?

34. Herek (2000)
On the one hand, people surveyed seemed to think that homosexuals deserved similar job opportunities
But when we got to specifics, old attitudes surfaced
See next two slides…

35. *
07/16/96
Do you think homosexuals should or should not have equal rights in terms of job opportunities?
100
Should Have Equal Rights
Percentage 50
Should NOT Have Equal Rights
1977
1982
1989
1992
1996
YEAR *

36. Percentage Saying “Should”*
07/16/96
Do you think homosexuals should or should not be hired for the following occupations?
100
Salespersons
Doctors
Percentage Saying “Should” 50
Many still believe homosexuals should be excluded from some jobs.
Clergy
Elementary School Teachers
1977
1982
1989
1992
1996
YEAR *

37. Sexual Harassment as Gender Discrimination
Fitzgerald (1993)
As many as 50% of women are sexually harassed during their academic or working lives
Faley et al. (1999)
U.S. Army spent $250 million in one year to deal with problems related to sexual harassment

38. Sexual Harassment as Gender Discrimination
Pryor & Day (1988)
Behavior seen as more harassing when performed by person in power
Sheets & Braver (1993)
Less harassing when performed by an attractive single individual
Terpstra & Baker (1986)
Women more likely than men to define staring and flirting as sexually harassing

39. Sexual Harassment as Gender Discrimination
Men are more likely to harass than are women
But whether men harass or not depends on the man, and on the situation
In one study, male students were asked to train a young woman on a complex word-processing task

40. Pryor, LaVite, & Stoller (1993)
Male participants were introduced to the female trainee (confederate) by a male graduate student (confederate) who acted either:
Sexist
Put his arm around trainee, visually checked out her body
Professional
Respectful of trainee

41. Pryor, LaVite, & Stoller (1993)
DV:
The amount of sexuality expressed by the male student while instructing the female trainee
IV:
Amount of exposure to sexual harassment
Results did not depend on the IV but rather depended on the participant’s chronic disposition to harass
So the situational factor here was relatively unimportant

42. Costs of Prejudice, Discrimination, and Stereotyping
Schulman et al. (1999)
Physicians were only 60% as likely to suggest a top-rated diagnostic test for black “heart patients” as for whites
Even when blacks presented same symptoms, and gave identical information about themselves

43. Costs of Prejudice, Discrimination, and Stereotyping
Ayres & Siegelman (1995)
This study found that white men were offered better deals on cars:
$109 less than White women
$318 less than Black women
$935 less than Black men

44. Stereotype threat… Can you see how a stereotype threat can develop…
You go to ATM and woman in front looks at you and seems nervous

45. Reducing Prejudice
One hypothesis is - negative stereotypes and prejudice are due to ignorance
From this perspective, simply exposing people to members of different groups should reduce prejudice
But merely putting different groups together has not generally worked

46. Reducing Prejudice Contact Hypothesis
Stereotypes and prejudice toward a group will diminish as contact with the group increases
Getting to know and hopefully to understand a group
Get two groups to work towards a common goal
Cooperation helps; competition hurts

47. Effective group contact…
Outgroup members have traits and abilities challenging negative stereotypes
Contact is supported by local authorities and norms
Groups are of equal status, at least in contact setting
Contact is at individual level
Contact is rewarding
Groups work toward common goals

48. Jigsaw Classroom
Each student in a mixed race group is given a different, and essential, task to complete towards a class project
This intervention takes advantage of each of the six principles of effective group contact

49. Back to the Rattlers and Eagles…
Importance of common goals was shown in the study of the Rattlers and Eagles…
When their only contact involved competitive games, interactions became increasingly negative
But then researchers forced the boys to cooperate towards common goals (such as starting a bus to take them all to a movie)

50. Ratings of Own Group
100
Ratings of Other Group 80 60
Percentage of Rattler and Eagle Ratings That Were Unfavorable 40 20
After Competition
After Cooperation
After competing, the Rattlers’ impressions of the Eagles were highly unfavorable, as were the Eagles’ impressions of the Rattlers

51. Ratings of Own Group
100
Ratings of Other Group 80 60
Percentage of Rattler and Eagle Ratings That Were Unfavorable 40 20
After Competition
After Cooperation
The hostility between the groups eventually turned into friendship and acceptance after they were induced to begin cooperating with each other

52. Finally, maybe we should just eliminate these altogether…