Psychology Of Prejudice: Chapter 9

Front 1

cognitive-dissonance theory

Back 1

States that inconsistent thoughts and/or behaviors bring about negative arousal. The arousal will motivate the individual to change one, or both of the inconsistencies in order to make them consistent and to reduce the negative arousal.

Front 2

confrontation technique

Back 2

A process whereby the individual is reminded of their endorsement of egalitarian values then confronted with the fact that they also hold attitudes that are inconsistent with egalitarian values (ie. stereotypes). when individuals are faced with this discrepancy, they will be motivated to change their attitudes (which are more malleable than values) to make them consistent with their values.

Front 3

contact hypothesis

Back 3

The notion that bringing two outgroups together in a situation will result in decreased prejudice and stereotyping.

Front 4

dissociation model

Back 4

States that low- and high-prejudice individuals automatically activate stereotypes of outgroups, but that low-prejudice persons also inhibit these thoughts with their egalitarian personal beliefs.

Front 5

functional approach

Back 5

Says that stereotyping and prejudice serve various motivational functions for different individuals. To reduce prejudice, it is important to understand what functions the stereotype serve and provide substitute psychological processes that do not entail stereotyping others but still allow the functions to be served.

Front 6

jigsaw system

Back 6

Technique for prejudice reduction in which outgroups are formed into small, cooperative, and interdependent groups that are working toward a common goal. Each group comprises an equal number of ingroup and outgroup members who contribute equally to the task success.

Front 7

normative influence

Back 7

Suggests that to reduce prejudice, it is important to make antiprejudice norms salient. Once people are made aware of the social sanctions against prejudice, they will be less likely to express and endorse prejudice.

Front 8

realistic conflict theory

Back 8

A theory on the origing of prejudice which suggest that when two groups compete for scarce resources, prejudice will arise between them.

Front 9

superordinate goal

Back 9

A task that requires the cooperation and efforts of two or more individuals to be completed successfully.

Front 10

transactional approach

Back 10

Suggests that prejudice reduction is most likely to occur when people interact cooperatively toward a common goal, and when they have motivation and opportunity to form friendships with outgroup members in that context.

Front 11

Common Ingroup Identity Model (Gaertner)

Back 11

-Assumption: prejudice reduced when perceptions of 2 separate groups (us vs them) became one inclusive category (we)

Front 12

Peer Socialization

Aboud and Fenwick (1999)

Back 12

- Paired high prejudiced students with low prejudiced peers (age 8-11)

- Found that talking with low prejudice peers successful in reducing prejudice of high prejudice peers

Front 13

Perspective taking and stereotyping

Galinsky and Moskowitz (2000)

Back 13

-Subjects wrote essays about the typical day o an elderly person

-Half given perspective-taking instructions, others none

-Results: Ss who took perspective of elderly person had less stereotypical description in essay

Front 14

Color-blind Approach

Back 14

- Assumption: people should only be assessed on their merits and qualifications. race, gender, or other social categories shouldnt matter.

- Main Crit: underestimates bias, prejudice, and discrimination in our society

Front 15

Multicultural Approach

(opposite of color-blind)

Back 15

-Assumption: Best way to achieve social harmony is to recognize and appreciate our diversity

- Main Crit: preserving ethnic/social categories promotes separatism and division and leads to conflict/discrimination

Front 16

Wolsko, Park, Judd, and Wittenbrink 2000

Back 16

- Conducted 3 studies examining question: which approach is more effect in reducing prejudice: color-blind or multicultural?

-Conclusions:

- Both CB and MC approaches equally effective in increasing positive affect for outgroups and decreasing awareness of negative outgroup stereotypes, but didnt lead to negative outgroup evaluations.