PSYC315 Essays


Terms in this set (...)

Definition of genocide
An attempt to exterminate a racial, ethnic, religious, cultural, or political group, either directly or indirectly by creating conditions that lead to the group's destruction.
NOTE the difference between genocide and mass-killing.
Hewstone and Cairns (2001)
Study/summary that lists several examples of more modern-day genocides, e.g. Rwanda.
E. Staub
Developed 3 major factors required for genocide to happen.
Staub's 3 factors for genocide:
1. Difficult life conditions
2. Cultural characteristics
3. Continuum of destruction
3 major causes of difficult life conditions:
1. Economic difficulties (depression etc)
2. Political conflict
3. Decline in prestige (Germany)
Psychological consequences of difficult life conditions:
- Threats to self-concept
- Resolving these problems can cause people to turn against outgroups
- Can cause devaluation of outgroup
- Can cause blaming of the outgroup
Cultural characteristics required for genocide:
- Cultural devaluation of subgroup
- Respect for/fear of authority
- Ideology
- Monolithic (rigid) society
History of aggression
Continuum of destruction:
Motivation to harm and kill people must evolve and progressively worsen over time.
E.G. German Kommandant slowly learning to be worse and worse
People learn genocide by participation
German Kommandant, Milgram shock experiments.
Citations for Genocide essay:
- Staub
- Hewstone and Cairns (2001).
Citations for Prejudice in Children essay:
- Clarke and Clarke
- Bigler (T-shirts)
- Vaughan (replicated in NZ Maori)
Citations for Contact Hypothesis essay:
- Allport (1954) (creator)
- Pettigrew (evidence of)
- Wilder (critique)
Citations for RCT essay:
- Campbell (1965) (creator)
- Sherif (empirical evidence)
What is the contact hypothesis?
Contact with an outgroup or its members will lead to a reduction in prejudice, in the right conditions.
Who coined the contact hypothesis?
Allport (1954)
Why does contact help reduce prejudice?
It allows the ingroup to begin to understand the points of view and thoughts of the outgroup.
Why may the contact hypothesis be ineffective?
- If contact is not wanted (if relations are too far gone)
- Anxious or uncomfortable during the contact
- If contact period is too short
Criteria for contact hypothesis to work:
- Equal status of groups (must have similar interests)
- Common goals (superordinate goals help increase harmony, as in RCT)
- Intergroup cooperation (duh)
- Support of authorities
- Personal interaction (interact on a personal level, so can really get to know each other)
Pettigrew (1988)'s evidence for contact hypothesis:
After the marine core was desegregated, black and white troops had lots of informal, good contact. Relations dramatically improved as a result, and the more voyages they spent together, the more positive racial attitudes became.
Main controversy/critique of the contact hypothesis:
Wilder argues that it may only reduce prejudice against the specific individuals that had contact, not the group as a whole. This can be fixed if the typicality of the individuals increases, so that they are accurate representations of the groups.
Implications of the contact hypothesis in real life:
In society's interests to encourage casual contact between different groups of people. E.g. councils could put on free concerts or other events for people to mingle at and get to know others.
The basic premise of Realistic Conflict Theory:
Attitudes and behaviours of an ingroup towards an outgroup are dependent on the objective interests of the ingroup.
2 implicit assumptions of RCT:
1. If the interests of ingroup and outgroup coincide, relations will be harmonious.
2. If the interests conflict, relations will be hostile, and lead to prejudice.
Stages of Sherif's study:
1. Boys split into groups, told to cooperate and come up with insignia, get to know each other etc
2. Forced into competition - tug of war etc, with prizes for winners, nothing for losers.
Findings of Sherif:
Supported RCT. Harmony at stage 1, conflict and prejudice at stage 2.
Hostility increased as the experiment went on - name-calling led to physical violence.
As soon as a mutual interest/superordinate goal was introduced, prejudice decreased.
Sherif example of a superordinate goal:
Fake truck 'break down' forced boys to work together constructively.
Superordinate goal definition:
A goal that requires 2 or more people to cooperate to achieve it.
Introducing superordinate goals is effective in minimising conflict ASSUMING:
Hostility between groups is really caused by conflicting goals.
Superordinate goals work, UNLESS:
The task is unsuccessful, in which case the ingroup blames the outgroup for the failure, and hostility/prejudice increases again.
Problems with Sherif's study:
- Lots going on in the camp = hard to pinpoint the cause of behaviour
- Participants became aware of what was happening/that they were part of an experiment
- Confirmation bias: study was set up to confirm Sherif's hypothesis
Brown in relation to prejudice:
Prejudice is generally dropping against races and sex, but still exists against other groups such as homosexuals and gypsies.
Who coined 'the bogus pipeline'?
Sigall and Page
What is the bogus pipeline?
An impressive looking machine, touted as a lie detector, which makes participants more honest in their responses as they don't see the point in lying. In these circumstances, people were more prejudiced.
Why were people more prejudiced in the bogus pipeline?
Because they didn't think they had to conform to societal norms to try and hide their prejudice.
What is a norm?
An unwritten but understood rule of behaviour that is acceptable in society.
Examples of the change of society leading to a change of social norms:
- Same-sex marriage movement (NZ, UK, US, soon AUS to legalise same-sex marriage)
- Black discrimination in the US - though note Trump's effect on this (setback)
The difference between modern and old-fashioned prejudice:
Modern prejudice is less blatant. It is socially unacceptable to be outwardly prejudiced, so prejudice has evolved to be more underlying and subtle than it used to be.
Who developed the Modern Racism Scale?
McConachy (1986)
McConachy's Modern Racism Scale:
1. Blacks have received more than they deserve
2. Govt. and media have shown Blacks more respect than they deserve
3. Blacks are too demanding in their push for equal rights
4. Discrimination against Blacks is no longer a problem
Findings of modern racism scale replicated in 2 other countries than the US:
- Australia (aborigines - still face discrimination)
- New Zealand (Maori - still similar treatment to blacks in some cases)
Who coined 'aversive prejudice'?
Dividio and Gaertner
What is aversive prejudice?
An unconscious anxiety and uncertainty about dealing with a certain group/race, despite seeming tolerant on the surface.
Divido and Gaertner's example of aversive prejudice:
Fake phone calls to garage over truck breakdown - varied ethnicity of caller, found blacks got less help and calls lasted less time.
The continuum of prejudice:
Prejudice gets worse the more old-fashioned it is. Aversive prejudice is the least bad.