Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination Chapter 12 Prepared by S. Saterfield From The Psychology of Prejudice and Discrimination, Whitley and Kite, 2006 s.saterfield, 2006

Download Report

Transcript Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination Chapter 12 Prepared by S. Saterfield From The Psychology of Prejudice and Discrimination, Whitley and Kite, 2006 s.saterfield, 2006

Slide 1

Reducing Prejudice
and Discrimination

Chapter 12

Prepared by S. Saterfield
From The Psychology of Prejudice and Discrimination, Whitley and Kite, 2006

s.saterfield, 2006

1


Slide 2

Individual Level Processes
Changes within the individual Approaches
Stereotype Suppression— replacing
stereotypical thoughts with non-prejudiced
thoughts

Self-regulation—people learn to recognize
situational cues that alert them to possibly acting
prejudice
Value confrontation—people are made aware of
contradictions between egalitarian values and
their prejudiced thoughts or behaviors
s.saterfield, 2006

2


Slide 3

Individual Level Processes
Changes within the individual
Approaches
Stereotype Suppression— replacing
stereotypical thoughts with non-prejudiced
thoughts
Rebound Effect
Stereotype Rebound

s.saterfield, 2006

3


Slide 4

Individual Level Processes
Changes within the individual
Approaches
Self-regulation—people learn to
recognize situational cues that alert them
to possibly acting prejudice
Replace the prejudiced response with an
appropriate responses
Developing cues for the control of prejudice
Using cues to control prejudice
Automatic control of prejudice
s.saterfield, 2006

4


Slide 5

Individual Level Processes
Changes within the individual
Approaches
Value confrontation—people are made
aware of contradictions between
egalitarian values and their prejudiced
thoughts or behaviors
Calls peoples attention to the contradictions
implied by placing a high value on freedom
while placing low value on equality.
s.saterfield, 2006

5


Slide 6

Intergroup Contact
Longest standing approach –Intergroup
contact theory
Contact between members of different
groups can lead to a reduction of prejudice
on both sides

s.saterfield, 2006

6


Slide 7

Intergroup Contact
Contact hypothesis:
Interaction between people changes their
beliefs and feelings toward each
other....thus, if only one had the
opportunity to communicate with others
and appreciate their way of life,
understanding and reduction of prejudice
would follow.

s.saterfield, 2006

7


Slide 8

Intergroup Contact
Conditions of Success for intergroup contact
theory
To reduce prejudice—four conditions must be met
Allport (1954)

1. Members of each group must have equal
status
2. Groups must work cooperatively to achieve
common goals
3. Situation must allow participants to get to
know each other as individuals
4. Intergroup effort must have the support of
authorities, law, or customs
s.saterfield, 2006

8


Slide 9

Intergroup Contact
Conditions of Success for intergroup
contact theory





Equal status
Cooperation
Acquaintance potential
Institutional Support

s.saterfield, 2006

9


Slide 10

Intergroup Contact
Effectiveness of Intergroup Contact
Types of changes produced





Reducing cognitive and emotional changes
Reducing expectations of negative interaction
Reducing intergroup anxiety
Cognitive Dissonance

Limiting factors



Meet all necessary conditions for successful
intergroup contact
Limiting preexisting intergroup attitudes

s.saterfield, 2006

10


Slide 11

Intergroup Contact
Intergroup contact theory—three
models
– Personalization model
– Salient categorization model
– Common group identity model

s.saterfield, 2006

11


Slide 12

Educational Interventions
 School Desegregation
 Cooperative Learning
 Multicultural and Anti-Bias
Education

s.saterfield, 2006

12


Slide 13

Workplace Intervention
 Affirmative Action

 Valuing Diversity
 Managing Diversity

s.saterfield, 2006

13


Slide 14

What Should Be Our
Goal?
 Color Blindness
 Multiculturalism

s.saterfield, 2006

14


Slide 15

What You Can Do To
Reduce Prejudice
 Influencing Your Own Attitude
 Influencing Other People’s Attitudes

s.saterfield, 2006

15