Prejudice, reverse prejudice, and positive attitude towards differences among people with intellectual disabilities.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Adolescent↗
SEARCH · PubMed Health
Results for “Prejudice”
Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
'They all look alike to me': prejudice and cross-race face recognition.
We investigated whether prejudice level influences the size of the other-race effect (poorer recognition of other-race compared with own-race faces). Previous studies, using self-report measures of prejudice, failed to find a relationship between prejudice and the other-race effect. We used an implicit prejudice measure, developed by Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, and Williams (1995), to determine whether implicit prejudice influences the size of the other-race effect. A self-report measure of prejudice, Walker's (1994) Attitudes to Asians Scale, was also included to replicate previous results. A group of 30 high prejudice and 30 low prejudice Caucasian participants, as determined by the self-report measure, were run through a procedure which assesses implicit prejudice and recognition performance at the same time. Neither implicit nor self-reported prejudice level influenced the size of the other-race effect. Unexpectedly, implicit and self-report prejudice influenced (in opposite ways) recognition of own-race faces. The implications of these results for understanding the other-race effect are discussed.
Adolescent↗
A justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice.
The authors propose a justification-suppression model (JSM), which characterizes the processes that lead to prejudice expression and the experience of one's own prejudice. They suggest that "genuine" prejudices are not directly expressed but are restrained by beliefs, values, and norms that suppress them. Prejudices are expressed when justifications (e.g., attributions, ideologies, stereotypes) release suppressed prejudices. The same process accounts for which prejudices are accepted into the self-concept The JSM is used to organize the prejudice literature, and many empirical findings are recharacterized as factors affecting suppression or justification, rather than directly affecting genuine prejudice. The authors discuss the implications of the JSM for several topics, including prejudice measurement, ambivalence, and the distinction between prejudice and its expression.
Conflict, Psychological↗
Social desirability of subtle and blatant prejudice scales.
The present paper analyzes the relation between the measurement of subtle and blatant prejudice proposed by Pettigrew and Meertens in 1995 and the tendency to give socially desirable responses. It also tests whether items that measure subtle prejudice are judged as more socially desirable than those that measure blatant prejudice. Data were obtained from two groups, one of 497 Italian high school students and one of 77 university students. In the first case, the analysis concerns the relation between the prejudice scores and scores on a shortened form of Marlowe and Crowne's Social Desirability Scale. In the second case, we analyzed the social desirability judgments expressed on single items of the Petrigrew and Meertens scales. Analyses indicate that (1) neither Subtle nor Blatant Prejudice scores correlate with the tendency to give socially desirable responses and (2) when the items of the two prejudice scales are placed in order on the social desirability continuum, with very few exceptions the Blatant Prejudice items are situated at the not socially acceptable pole and Subtle Prejudice items at the socially acceptable pole.
Adolescent↗
Case studies of pre- and midtrial prejudice in criminal and civil litigation.
This paper presents a number of case studies involving pre- and midtrial prejudice in criminal and civil litigation. The cases reveal deficiencies in the way that prejudicial publicity has been conceptualized and operationalized in many simulation experiments. The studies reveal that potential juror prejudices that concern lawyers and judges involve more than just main effects of mass media. Pre- and midtrial prejudice also involves more general prejudices, gossip and rumor, the assertion of community normative values about justice, and conformity pressures. Four categories of prejudice recognized in American law are described and labeled: interest, specific, generic, and conformity prejudice. The case studies also reveal interesting dynamics involving "minimization" and inconsistency in jurors' self-reports of attitudes which contradict a commonly held judicial view that superficial questioning is sufficient to uncover prejudice. Despite identifying deficiencies in the simulation literature, the paper concludes that experimental research is necessary to provide answers to causal questions that case studies and field research cannot ordinarily provide.
Civil Rights↗
Prejudice, internalization, and the accessibility of personal standards for responding to gay men.
Heterosexual participants who were very low, moderately low, moderately high and very high in prejudice toward gay men reported their personal standards for responding to gay men (i.e., how they believed they should feel or think in an imagined scenario involving a gay man) via computer. As expected, the standards of very low-prejudice individuals were the least prejudiced, the most internalized (i.e., most important and central to the self), and the most accessible (i.e., reported most quickly). Regression analyses revealed the predicted relation between accessibility and internalization, such that the more internalized the standard the greater its accessibility. A significant quadratic trend for prejudice revealed that accessibility decreases with increasing prejudice, except that at very high levels of prejudice accessibility begins to increase. Implications for prejudice reduction for both low- and high-prejudice individuals are discussed.
Female↗
Social norms and the expression and suppression of prejudice: the struggle for internalization.
The authors studied social norms and prejudice using M. Sherif and C. W. Sherif's (1953) group norm theory of attitudes. In 7 studies (N = 1,504), social norms were measured and manipulated to examine their effects on prejudice; both normatively proscribed and normatively prescribed forms of prejudice were included. The public expression of prejudice toward 105 social groups was very highly correlated with social approval of that expression. Participants closely adhere to social norms when expressing prejudice, evaluating scenarios of discrimination, and reacting to hostile jokes. The authors reconceptualized the source of motivation to suppress prejudice in terms of identifying with new reference groups and adapting oneself to fit new norms. Suppression scales seem to measure patterns of concern about group norms rather than personal commitments to reducing prejudice; high suppressors are strong norm followers. Compared with low suppressors, high suppressors follow normative rules more closely and are more strongly influenced by shifts in local social norms. There is much value in continuing the study of normative influence and self-adaptation to social norms, particularly in terms of the group norm theory of attitudes.
Analysis of Variance↗
Henri Tajfel's 'cognitive aspects of prejudice' and the psychology of bigotry.
This paper pays tribute to Tajfel's classic article 'Cognitive aspects of prejudice' and re-examines its central arguments. Tajfel's paper is important for outlining a social cognitive approach to the study of prejudice and also for refuting of what Tajfel called the 'blood-and-guts' approach. Taking Tajfel's proposition that social psychology is not value-free, the current paper examines the moral and political view of 'Cognitive aspects' and also the gaps in its approach to the study of prejudice. It is suggested that this cognitive approach has difficulty in accounting for extreme bigotry, at least without recourse to the motivational themes that the approach seeks to exclude. In particular, there would be limitations in applying this approach in order to understand the Holocaust. Indeed, Tajfel did not attempt to do so, for reasons that are discussed. Tajfel's Social Identity Theory (SIT) has similar limitations. The paper also examines Tajfel's use of the term 'depersonalization', which he described as a 'milder' form of dehumanization of out-groups. Later social identity theorists have tended to use 'depersonalization' differently, shifting their attention to in-groups. Their perspective moves away from understanding the topic of prejudice in the way that can be found in Tajfel's 'Cognitive aspects of prejudice'. Finally, the present paper suggests how extreme prejudice might be studied without returning to the motivational 'blood-and-guts' approach that Tajfel so cogently criticized.
Cognition↗
Anti-Semitic prejudice in adolescence: an Italian study on shared beliefs.
A study was conducted in Bologna and Venice on a sample of 427 subjects to verify whether anti-Semitic prejudice is observed in Italy, if it has direct, violent expression (blatant prejudice), or if it assumes less evident forms (subtle prejudice). The sample was chosen to represent levels of contact with the Jewish community to check the contact hypothesis (Bologna for the no-contact condition and Venice for the contact-condition) in groups of different ages (adolescents, young people, and adults). We predicted a decrease in blatant prejudice by subjects living in contact with Jews, but no differences in subtle prejudice. Also adolescents, more sensitive to polarised choices, could be less tolerant towards Jews. One-way analysis of variance indicated evidence for anti-Semitic prejudice, whose typical expression was a lack of positive emotions towards Jews. In particular, the whole sample denied negative emotions, such as disregard, annoyance, and irritation, and did not report positive emotions, such as attraction or curiosity.
Adolescent↗
Social influence effects on automatic racial prejudice.
Although most research on the control of automatic prejudice has focused on the efficacy of deliberate attempts to suppress or correct for stereotyping, the reported experiments tested the hypothesis that automatic racial prejudice is subject to common social influence. In experiments involving actual interethnic contact, both tacit and expressed social influence reduced the expression of automatic prejudice, as assessed by two different measures of automatic attitudes. Moreover, the automatic social tuning effect depended on participant ethnicity. European Americans (but not Asian Americans) exhibited less automatic prejudice in the presence of a Black experimenter than a White experimenter (Experiments 2 and 4), although both groups exhibited reduced automatic prejudice when instructed to avoid prejudice (Experiment 3). Results are consistent with shared reality theory, which postulates that social regulation is central to social cognition.
Automatism↗
What does the implicit association test measure? A test of the convergent and discriminant validity of prejudice-related IATs.
Drawing on recent criticism of the Implicit Association Test (IAT), the present study tested the convergent and discriminant validity of two prejudice-related IATs to corresponding explicit prejudice measures in a German student sample (N = 61). Confirming convergent validity, (a) an IAT designed to assess negative associations related to Turkish people was significantly related to the explicit endorsement of prejudiced beliefs about Turkish people, and (b) an IAT designed to assess negative associations related to East Asians was significantly related to explicit prejudice against East Asians. Moreover, confirming discriminant validity, (c) the Asian IAT was unrelated to the explicit endorsement of prejudiced beliefs about Turkish people, and (d) the Turkish IAT was unrelated to explicit prejudice against Asian people. These results further corroborate the assumption that the IAT is a valid method to assess the strength of evaluative associations in the domain of prejudice and stereotypes.
Adult↗
Implicit prejudice and stereotyping: how automatic are they? Introduction to the special section.
This special issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: Attitudes and Social Cogniition addresses issues of the measurement and the malleability of implicit prejudice and stereotypes. The findings raise fundamental questions about the assumptions underlying the assessment of implicit prejudice, particularly with regard to the widely used Implicit Association Test and the assumption of extant models of prejudice and stereotyping that implicit biases are automatically and invariantly activated when perceivers come in contact with members of stigmatized groups. Several of the articles show that contextual manipulations produce reductions in implicit manifestations of prejudice and stereotyping. The articles in this issue, in challenging conventional wisdom, are thought provoking and should be generative in the field's ongoing efforts to understand the role of implicit (and explicit) processes involved in prejudice and stereotyping.
Attitude↗
Does social dominance generate prejudice? Integrating individual and contextual determinants of intergroup cognitions.
Social dominance orientation (SDO) has been proposed as an important variable in the explanation of prejudice. We distinguish between three conceptualizations of SDO: SDO as a personality trait (personality model), SDO as a moderator of the effects of situational variables (Person x Situation model), and SDO as a mediator of the effect of social position on prejudice (group socialization model [GSM]). Four studies (N = 1.657) looking at the relations between social positions, SDO, and prejudice in a natural setting and in a laboratory setting provide strong support for the GSM. In contrast to previous correlational findings, there is evidence of a cause (dominant social position), an effect (prejudice increases), and a mediator (SDO). These results suggest new perspectives on the integration of individual and contextual determinants of prejudice.
Adult↗
The development of prejudice towards gays and lesbians by adolescents.
The authors studied the development of gay and lesbian prejudice in white, suburban adolescents in grades 7, 9, and 11. Results parallel several major findings with adults: males were more prejudiced than females; this difference was greater towards gay males than lesbians; and same-sex prejudice was greater than opposite-sex prejudice. For males and females prejudice increased between grades 7 and 9, but from grades 9 to 11 it decreased for females and increased for males. These differences were explained by the increased vulnerability of males to defensive reactions in response to the prospect of intimate relationships. None of the personality measures were significantly correlated with prejudice.
Adolescent↗
Antihypertensive therapy: pride and prejudice.
CLINICAL TRIALS: Investigators of hypertension can be proud of the indisputable successes achieved by antihypertensive therapy and of the correct methodology (randomized controlled trials) by which those successes have been proved. However, hypertension experts should not allow pride to turn into prejudice. Numerous aspects of antihypertensive treatment remain to be clarified. Indeed, that all goals of antihypertensive treatment have been achieved is clear prejudice. Although randomized trials have been essential for establishing the benefits of antihypertensive therapy, claiming that randomized trials are the only valid methodology for providing treatment benefits is another instance in which pride might turn into prejudice. Indeed, there is a large gap between trials and practice, and trials may both overestimate and underestimate the benefits of treatment. Furthermore, event-based trials are not the only valid type of trials, as is often claimed. If the goals of treatment are both to prevent events and avoid or reduce organ damage, then we need both event-based and organ damage-based types of trials. MEASUREMENTS OF SUCCESS: Assessment of the absolute risk and, consequently, calculation of the absolute benefit to be expected from treatment have appropriately been emphasized in recent guidelines for the management of hypertension as instruments to evaluate cost-effectiveness of treatment. However, there is reason for caution against an indiscriminate worship of this concept, because earlier treatment of milder, uncomplicated hypertension is an effective measure by which to prevent development of more severe and complicated hypertension, the treatment of which may be less successful, if success is measured by the residual mortality and morbidity of even well treated patients. BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS: Finally, we are still ignorant of the best way to measure blood pressure in order to decide upon initiation and success of treatment. Supporters both of clinic blood pressure measurements and of home or ambulatory blood pressure monitoring have their own prejudices; the problem can only be solved by further research. As in Jane Austen's novel, before the happy end both pride and prejudice must be conquered.
Antihypertensive Agents↗
Prejudice, social distance, and familiarity with mental illness.
In this study, the paths between two prejudicial attitudes (authoritarianism and benevolence) and a proxy measure of behavioral discrimination (social distance) were examined in a sample drawn from the general public. Moreover, the effects of two person variables (familiarity with mental illness and ethnicity) on prejudice were examined in the path analysis. One hundred fifty-one research participants completed measures of prejudice toward, social distance from, and familiarity with mental illness. Goodness-of-fit indexes from path analyses supported our hypotheses. Social distance is influenced by both kinds of prejudice: authoritarianism (the belief that persons with mental illness cannot care for themselves, so a paternalistic health system must do so) and benevolence (the belief that persons with mental illness are innocent and childlike). These forms of prejudice, in turn, are influenced by the believers' familiarity with mental illness and their ethnicity. We also discuss how these findings might contribute to a fuller understanding of mental illness stigma.
Adult↗
Are essentialist beliefs associated with prejudice?
Gordon Allport (1954) proposed that belief in group essences is one aspect of the prejudiced personality, alongside a rigid, dichotomous and ambiguity-intolerant cognitive style. We examined whether essentialist beliefs-beliefs that a social category has a fixed, inherent, identity-defining nature-are indeed associated in this fashion with prejudice towards black people, women and gay men. Allport's claim, which is mirrored by many contemporary social theorists, received partial support but had to be qualified in important respects. Essence-related beliefs were associated strongly with anti-gay attitudes but only weakly with sexism and racism, and they did not reflect a cognitive style that was consistent across stigmatized categories. When associations with prejudice were obtained, only a few specific beliefs were involved, and some anti-essentialist beliefs were associated with anti-gay attitudes. Nevertheless, the powerful association that essence-related beliefs had with anti-gay attitudes was independent of established prejudice-related traits, indicating that they have a significant role to play in the psychology of prejudice.
Adult↗
Prejudice as stress: conceptual and measurement problems.
In the field of social sciences, there has been a renewed interest in studying prejudice and discrimination as stressors and assessing their impact on various health outcomes. This raises a need for theoretically based and psychometrically sound measures of prejudice. As researchers approach this task, there are several conceptual issues that need to be addressed. The author describes 3 such issues related to (1) individual versus structural measures of the impact of prejudice, (2) objective versus subjective assessments of stress, and (3) measures of major events versus everyday discrimination. How researchers approach the problem of measurement depends on the specific study aims, but they must consider these conceptual issues and understand the advantages and limitations of various approaches to the study of prejudice as stress.
Classification↗