Prejudice and discrimination

Defintions
1. Prejudice: A rigid set of attitudes or beliefed towards particular groups of people. These attitudes are usually negative but not always.
2. Discrimination: Treating someone favourably or unfavourable beacuse they belong to a particular group. This is due to peoples' prejudice views.
Adorno
1. Adorno's explanation
  1. Authoritarian personality types are prone to being prejudice. Adorno stated that people with an authoritarian personality are more likely to be prejudice towards others.
    1. Characteristics include: - Disliking Jews -Traditional values -Respecting higher status and looking down on lower status -Strict parents -Stick rigidly to their beliefs
  2. Evaluation
    1. Conducted in America ⇨ cannot be applied cross-culturally
    2. Does not explain why people that grow up with strict parents are not prejudice or why people without strict parents are prejudice
    3. Doesn't explain why some people are prejudice towards some groups and not others, but does show a relationship between prejudice and authoritarian however does not determine cause and effect
2. Adorno's study
  1. Aim
    1. To find out if there is a relationship between a person's personality type and prejudiced beliefs.
  2. Method
    1. Hundreds of people were interviewed and tested using the F-scale.
  3. Results
    1. They found a relationship between personality traits and prejudiced views.
  4. Conclusion
    1. There is an authoritarian personality and people with these characteristics are highly likely to be prejudiced towards others
  5. Evaluation
    1. Study conducted in America ⇨ results cannot be applied cross-culturally
    2. Correlational research ⇨ showed a relationship between authoritarianism and prejudiced views, however study does not determine cause and effect
    3. Statements on the F-scale are easier to agree with than disagree with ⇨ unreliable measure
Tajfel
1. Tajfel's explanation
  1. In-groups are people that you have something in common with.
  2. Out-groups are people that you have nothing in common with
  3. Within the in-group you form a social identity and feel a sense of belonging. The group can help you build your self-esteem. You tend to view your in-group positively, whereas we do not favour (and feel negatively about) the out-group.
    1. Evaluation
      1. Lot of empirical evidence to support explanation ⇨ valid
      2. Study that theory was tested by used 14-15 year old boys in one country ⇨ results difficult to generalise ⇨ validity of theory can be questioned ⇨ cannot be applied cross-culturally
2. Tajfel's study
  1. Aim
    1. To show how easily people discriminate against their out-groups
  2. Method
    1. 14-15 year old boys were randomly put in to two groups. They had to play a game where they awared pairs of points to their group and the other. They were told they could be swapped for prizes at the end
  3. Results
    1. The boys awarded points by choosing the pairings that made the biggest difference between groups, not the pairings that gave the most points.
  4. Conclusion
    1. People will discriminate against others just because they are members of an out-group.
  5. Evaluation
    1. Artificial task of getting boys to compete in points game ⇨ not representitive of real life ⇨ lacks ecological validity
    2. 14-15 year old boys used ⇨ results not generalisable to females/ages ⇨ sample not representitive
    3. Points game is very simple ⇨ pariticipants may figure out aim ⇨ display demand characteristics
Sherif
1. Sherif's explanation
  1. According to Sherif, prejudice and discrimination is a result of competition caused by scarce resources. He said inter-group conflict can occur, which is when people in the same group experience conflict, because they want the same thing. He suggests competition increases unity within groups and conflict with other groups.
  2. Evaluation
    1. Another researcher replicated the method with the difference being the sample was Scouts, and they knew each other before study began. Found no hostility or prejudice found by Sherif ⇨ questions validity of theory
    2. Shows relationship between competition and prejudice ⇨ cause and effect cannot be determined, prejudice may occur before competition⇨ competition could just be a trigger
2. Sherif's study
  1. Aim
    1. To find out if prejudice develops when groups are in competition for scarce resources
  2. Method
    1. American summer camp was organised for 22 boys, randomly split into two teams, who were kept away from each other, unaware that the other team existed. They formed a group identity and then the camp staff introduced a series of competitions with the prize for the winning team of a silver cup.
  3. Results
    1. The teams began unpleasant name-calling and tired to attack each other very quickly.
  4. Conclusion
    1. Competition is a cause of prejudice
  5. Evaluation
    1. American boys used ⇨ results not generalisable to girls/cultures
    2. Field experiment in a summer camp, a real place ⇨ likely that boys showed natural behaviour ⇨ increasing ecological validity
    3. Name-calling and fights ⇨ boys experienced distress ⇨ psychological harm ⇨ unethical study

Next up

Prejudice and discrimination

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by alanah.sarginson over 9 years ago