Stereotypes are:

Stereotypes ar judgements that are used to:

Can stereotypes be used to imply judgement?

Katz and Brady (1933) measured the ethnic stereotypes held by a group of college undergraduates. It was replicated later by other researchers (Gilbert, 1951; Karlins, Coffman & Walters, 1969). What were they called?

Was the Katz and Brady (1933) longitudinal?

The stereotypes used by the college undergraduates in the Katz and Brady (1933) study were:

Madon (et al., 2001) found the stereotypes used in the Katz and Brady (1933) study were:

Discursive research looks at how:

Do the findings from the Karlins, Coffman and Walters (1969), as well as the Madon (et al., 2001) studies show that stereotypes are fluid - that they change over time?

The changes in stereotypes relate to:

Changes in stereotypes that are influenced by socio-political events are typically about:

Do stereotypes operate on an individual level?

Do we need ideological analysis according to Billig (1985, 2002) to analyse how stereotypes are motivated?

There are normative ideas, constructions or content that are widespread in cultures (eg, Muslims in the United States) that are used to promote particular power structures. These are:

In 1881, the ideology of the Irish people by British was that:

In the present, the ideology of the Irish people by the British is that:

Stereotype content research (Karlins, Coffman & Walters, 1969; Madon, et al., 2001) mentions broad features on context. But can stereotypes vary enormously between groups (eg, African Americans and Latin Americans)?

What has more recent stereotype content focused on?

Can the constructions of prejudice, including context, also vary depending on local interactional content (eg, stereotypes) according to Billig (1985, 2002)?

Would stereotype content between two neighbours talking across a fence be different if one of the neighbour's granddaughters - who is anti-racism - was present?

According to Billig (1985, 2002), does the construction of prejudice differ across the same person depending on the argumentative context of which they find themselves in? For example, talking to someone who shares (eg, a family member) the same views compared to someone who might not (eg, a stranger).

A survey respondent who holds prejudicial constructions:

Two neighbours may agree with each other, therefore:

Two neighbours may (or may not) need to defend their prejudiced talk if someone (eg, an anti-racist granddaughter).

According to Billig (2002), is prejudice constructed as an individual cognitve event in the head?

"I'm not anti them at all you know. I, if they're willing to get on and be like us; but they're just going to come here, just to be able to use our social welfares and stuff like that, then why don't they stay at home?" (Potter & Wetherell, 1987). What does this talk use?

"I'm not a racist/sexist/homophobe, but" is ...

Billig (1985, 2002) has conducted a wealth of research into claims that are treated as obvious and universally acceptable. What are they called?

An example of Billig's assertions of universally acceptable claims is politicians that say:

Billig (1991) noted an article by National Front that said: "Dare we say it - it is they, not we, who are prejudiced?". First, it tries to:

Billig (1991) noted an article by National Front that said: "Dare we say it - it is they, not we, who are prejudiced?". Second, it tries to:

Irish gay rights activist and drag queen Fanti was threatened with legal action in 2014 for calling anti-gay marriage activists "homophobic". What is this?

Has the discursive approach into stereotypes used enough interactional sequential context?

Conversation analysis removes the interactional and sequential context in prejudice research and looks at standalone talk. According to Condor (et al., 2006), do we need sequential context?

In the Condor (et al., 2006), Mrs. A's right to carry on speaking on the topic is because:

How is the potential competitive or challenging talk from Mr. B welcomed by Mrs. A in the Condor (et al., 2006) study?

Is it easy or difficult to obtain authentic recorded examples of prejudice conversations in everyday talk?

We can only obtain:

In the Condor (et al., 2006) study, is Cliff - the researcher - still part of the study? Do participants still respond to him and his actions (including silence) in the talk?

Do we need more data of prejudiced talk in everyday interactions?

From a cognitive social psychology perspective, does discursive research sufficiently articulate the cognitive processes and causes relate to prejudice?

The findings from the discursive approach inform what type of psychology about research into prejudice? For example, how prejudice talk treats itself as a potentially sanctionable activity, how prejudiced talk constructs versions of the denigrated other, and how prejudiced talk is produced collaboratively).

According to Billig (2002), is the hatred separate from the discourse?

According to Allport (1954), intergroup conflict under the right conditions would:

Pettigrew and Troop (2006) in their meta-analysis found that intergroup contact generally:

Does the contact theory generalise characteristics of one group member to an entire population of the said group?

Can the contact theory be extended broadly (eg, racial groups, ethnic groups)?

Brown and Hewstone (2005) found intergroup contact to be the most successful when:

Brown and Hewstone (2005) found that the potential for interpersonal relationships is high when:

According to Pettigrew and Troop (2006) can prejudice be reduced through vicarious experiences (eg, through friends and family) and no contact with outgroup members occurs?

Crisp and Turner (2009) found that "positively toned imagined contact"

Are there demand characteristics in the Crisp and Turner (2009) research?

Is there stereotype priming in the Crisp and Turner (2009) research?

Can Fanti the gay rights activist live with Mary in Wicklow?