Whether we are talking about ethnic cleansings, group hatred or retraction of equity laws under the guise that these are unfair, the underlying issue is the same.
Calvin Lai Kelly M. Nosek University of Virginia Word count: BoxCharlottesville, VA E-mail may be sent to clai virginia. Cite this article as: Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7, In this review, we summarize evidence for three mechanisms that influence the expression of implicit prejudice: We then review the evidence or lack thereof for answers to five open issues in implicit prejudice reduction research: Addressing these issues provide an agenda for clarifying the conditions and implications of reducing implicit prejudice.
This variation may be explained in part by the social pressures against holding negative attitudes toward some groups and how much people have elaborated on those attitudes Nosek, There are two driving factors of this research interest.
The first is a basic research question: Here, the focus is on the independent variable — manipulations designed to identify and isolate a single psychological process responsible for change.
The second is a practical research question: Here, the focus is on the dependent variable — implicit prejudice, and how much it shifts as a function of the intervention. In this review, we summarize the present evidence for mechanisms of change and for practical effectiveness, and chart a path toward a comprehensive understanding of reducing implicit prejudice and its influence on behavior.
Mechanisms for Reducing Implicit Prejudice For this review, we organized interventions based on their presumed mechanism of change: Implicit attitudes, of which implicit prejudice is a special case, are understood to reflect associations between concepts e. Evaluative conditioning provides experience linking concepts with attributes that differ from their preexisting attitudes to retrain or create alternative attitudes.
For example, Olson and Fazio briefly presented participants with positive images and words paired with Black faces, and negative images and words paired with White faces. Exposure to these pairings reduced implicit racial prejudice immediately, and this change persisted at a follow-up assessment two days later.
The logic of retraining associations appears in other approaches as well. This change may have been due to the self — a concept strongly associated with good Greenwald et al.
Shook and Faziofor instance, took advantage of a natural experiment of college roommate assignments where White students were randomly assigned to live with a Black roommate or a White roommate.
After one semester, they found that Whites assigned to live with a Black roommate exhibited less implicit prejudice than Whites assigned to live with a White roommate.
Notably, some evidence suggests that intergroup contact affects explicit and implicit prejudice differently. Both perspectives can be adapted to accommodate virtually any findings. Degree of cognitive elaboration may influence implicit attitudes through deliberative reasoning, whereby newly-gained knowledge leads to the activation of positive associations with attitude objects.
Shifting the Context A common assumption of the associative changes reviewed in the prior section is that the reductions in implicit prejudice are long-lasting. However, some manipulations may induce temporary shifts by changing the social or emotional context.
These shifts could have considerable influence in the specific contexts in which they occur but fade rapidly. A similar approach shifts the representation of the target group by focusing the target of evaluation on a subtype of the outgroup or by reframing the identity of the outgroup.
Likewise, Black targets are evaluated more positively when categorized by occupation rather than by race Mitchell et al. Presenting targets within particular social roles and environments also influences implicit evaluations. Similarly, Black targets are evaluated more positively when the targets are placed in front of positive backgrounds e.
Emotional states interact with prejudiced attitudes through mood-based regulation of automatic processing or through the association of specific emotions with groups.
However, positive moods can sometimes lead to decreased implicit prejudice because it encourages pursuit of accessible goals. For example, Huntsinger and Sinclair found that participants who were in a positive mood exhibited reduced implicit prejudice when they wanted to get along with an interaction partner with ostensibly egalitarian views.
When participants were not motivated to affiliate with the partner or did not infer that their partner held egalitarian views, positive mood did not reduce implicit prejudice relative to negative mood.
Anger and disgust can increase implicit prejudice for groups associated with those emotions i. No published research demonstrates evidence for a specific emotion that directly reduces implicit prejudice, however. One exception may be a recent study where the administration of Propranolol, a medication used to lower blood pressure and anxiety, also elicited less implicit prejudice compared to a placebo group, perhaps because it reduces threat-based responses to outgroup members Terbeck et al.
Situational goals, motives, or behavioral strategies may not affect the existence of implicit prejudice, but instead alter its expression.a compelling account of this change in the expression of prejudice.
Finally, We then evaluate the value or worth of our social identities primarily by comparing our group with other groups. The basic particularly prejudice directed toward African Americans, is becoming less common. Prejudice: an unjustifiable negative attitude toward a group and its individual members based on stereotypes.
These negative attitudes stem from emotional associations, negative beliefs, and the need to justify behavior. Prejudice, Discrimination, and Stereotyping By Susan T. Fiske. Princeton University. People are often biased against others outside of their own social group, showing prejudice (emotional bias), stereotypes (cognitive bias), and discrimination (behavioral bias).
A new way to combat prejudice?
Dweck, Stanford graduate student Priyanka Carr and postdoctoral student Kristin Parker, PhD, are also tackling the complex area of prejudice. In a series of studies currently under review, the team again began by looking at whether people believe prejudice is a fixed or malleable trait.
Perspective on "Prejudice" and "Bigotry". Prejudice occurs when some person or group believes “I am or my people are superior to you and your people, so I am / we are entitled to more (dignity, power, freedom, assets, status, opportunity).This is an absolute truth, and is .
Lecture 02 - Social Psych. Attitudes (Adapted from Liska; Handbook of Social Psychology We are more likely to change our attitudes if doing so allows us to fulfill our goals or avoid undesirable consequences.
B. it is a result of other behaviors. Attitudes toward premarital sex and use of contraceptive might not show such discrepancies.