Upgrade to remove ads
Chapter 12- Stereotyping, Prejudice, and Discrimination
Terms in this set (32)
negative valence attitudes
negative behaviors- exclusionary behavior
collection of thoughts, schema about the same social group
the evolved cognitive system and categorization
-we are bombarded with INFO
-info linked together: cognitive system with linked representations
Examples of Social Categorization
1. Class Category
-norms- sit, talk, take notes
-length- 75 min
2. Friendship Category
-their attitudes are similar to mine
-behaviors- netflix binging, study
So how does categorization promote survival?
SPEED OF SYSTEM
-prevents disease and threats
*avoid danger, having information at the ready
example: caveman with T-Rex: T-Rex category- info--> run 30 mi hr, carnivore
-see T-Rex> scared> know to hide
Categorization and the simplification of our decisions
example: Chair category
-attributes- 4 legs
- behavior: sit
Social categorization- work well for most things, why?
There is very little variance among chairs.
MORE COMPLEX CATEGORY- errors are more likely
More complex Categories= more errors likely
-Stereotype: Women Category
-stereotype: of guy (loves star wars may be
- my category info was wrong (didn't like Star
*the evolved cognitive system and categorization
Critical Thinking- How can our evolved cognitive system, based on categorizing information, lead to prejudice and discrimination?
The stereotype can be based on small group.
-example: Jerks from Duke at a game- leads to affect of not liking them
Why, when a category (stereotype) is shown to be inaccurate, do some people not change?
-assimilation, do what takes the least energy
*easier to assimilate
Stimulus AUTOMATICALLY activates relevant categories
-most salient characteristics activate social categories
1. CUE SALIENCE
-professional fighter (dangerous and unstable)
2. Associated with Stimulus
-process for all stimuli
What happens when stimulus is ambiguous/doesn't really fit?
when we can't place stimuli into a category, people become ANXIOUS
How do we reduce stereotyping of others?
-contact exposure hypothesis
-actively short circuit
Devine (1989) Dissociation Model
-explaining stereotyping and prejudice
1. Categorization- based on any social cue (affiliation, race, info becomes active and floods cognitive system)- STEREOTYPED
2. Controlled- individuating info- adjusting for specific person
*controlled piece differentiates whose more likely to stereotype
According to Devine's model, what else will reduce stereotyping (prejudice)?
- a more diversified social category
How does one change what is in the category?
-experience with a social group
-common goal- based actions with group
SITUATIONS can also increase use of category info (automatic, step 1) over individuation (controlled, step 2)
1. Time Pressure
2. Cognitive Load
4. Low Motivation (cognitive effort)
Stereotype Threat (Steele & Aronson, 1995)
1. Undergrad Female participants take Math Exam
**Circle Gender: Woman (yes or no)
-This act inhibited cognitive focus which made
performance a lot worse (stereotype threat).
-Asian-American (yes or no)
*Asian-Americans performed above the base level
*the anxiety of confirming a stereotype= stereotype threat
2. Athletic Task
-put golf ball
- example of pure athletic skill
-men circled race or ethnicity
*when not circled- performance remained
Self Affirmation Moderates Threat
- 10 seconds of self affirmation rids threat
- threat, then self affirm
Threat can increase...
negative emotions, stress
Realistic Conflict Theory
-conflict over limited resources (evolutionary)
-limited food, protection
*revolutionary beneficial to discriminate (against groups that would kill you or steal your food)
Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979)
-categorization leads to in-groups & out-groups
-In-groups: favoritism and heterogeneity
-Out-group: derogation and homogeneity--> all more or less the same (ex: all Mexicans)
Predictors of Prejudice/Discrimination (more prejudice)
B= f (Person, X)
-high in authoritarianism
-social dominance orientation
-low on the equality of people=more likely to be
B= f (X, Situation)
-conformity: can push someone to more discriminatory response: Group Polarization, Group Think
Depends on prevailing GROUP NORMS
-example: if group norm=equality THEN you are pushed towards equality
Hate Groups and Extreme Prejudice
-INSTITUTIONALIZED stereotyping, prejudice and discrimination.
-out group derogation- INJUNCTIVE SOCIAL NORM
-deinviduation of members (lose self identity, further adopt group norms)
-self-perception: They believe they are on the side of good.
Critical Thinking: In the face of overwhelming information demonstrating their wrongness- how do they stay consistent?
-false-consensus bias: everyone thinks like me, they are just too afraid to say it
-selective attention: inhibit outside info
-confirmation bias: confirm what they believe in
*consistency veers away from cognitive dissonance (this is their way of avoiding negative dissonance)
*major dissonance could lead to breakdowns
*difficult to reduce prejudice/discrimination
1. Mutual Interdependence
2. Common Goal
3. Equal Status
4. Informal, interpersonal contact
5. Multiple Contacts
6. Social Norms of Equality
-in elementary schools
-long-term prejudice reduction
-paired ethnic/racial- common task, common goal
THIS SET IS OFTEN IN FOLDERS WITH...
Psych Chapter 6 (Reading)
Psych- chapter 7 (Reading)
Chapter 8- Relationships
Chapter 10- Group Influence
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE...
MCAT Behavioral Sciences | Kaplan Guide
psyc 260 ch 12
PSYC 260 Module 10
Psych Guide #11 - Social Psychology
OTHER SETS BY THIS CREATOR
Lekcja 12 (Hurra 2)
More Aspekt Pairs