Effects of External and Internal Motivation to Control Prejudice on Implicit Prejudice: The Mediating Role of Efforts to Control Prejudiced Responses

We examined the effects of internal and external motivation to control prejudice on implicit prejudice, focusing on identifying a mediator of the relation between external motivation and implicit prejudice. White participants completed internal and external motivation to control prejudice measures several weeks before completing the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Participants who were more internally motivated showed less implicit prejudice, whereas those who were more externally motivated displayed more implicit prejudice. Consistent with an ironic processes explanation, the effect of external motivation on increased implicit prejudice was mediated by efforts to control prejudiced responses.     

对抗偏见:作为偏见消减策略的社会行为

对抗偏见是偏见对象或旁观者对偏见持有者表示不满的社会行为,能够降低偏见持有者的偏见水平,并有助于形成反偏见的社会规范,是一种有效的偏见消减策略。对抗偏见领域的研究可分为对抗偏见效果研究与对抗偏见行为研究。前者主要采用材料型和实验型研究范式,关注对抗偏见的作用机制、具体效果及对抗偏见效果的影响因素;后者主要采用回顾型、实时记录型和前瞻型研究范式,关注对抗偏见行为的发生机制和影响因素。将来这一领域需注重研究范式的综合使用及生态效度的提高,以促进对抗偏见效果研究与对抗偏见行为研究的有机结合;并在对抗偏见的神经机制和有效策略方面进一步深入探索。     

Prejudice Against Muslim Australians: The Role of Values,Gender and Consensus

Data from an Australian community survey (n = 189) examining the predictors of prejudice against Muslim Australians were analysed. Using thematic analysis, we investigated the specific values our participants reported regarding their perceptions of Muslim Australians and Islam. We then investigated the relationship between prejudice against Muslim Australians, the most important value priorities given by our participants, and other prejudice‐related variables. After entry into a regression analysis, the participants high in prejudice were found to be significantly more likely to have lower educational levels and more right‐wing views. They were also significantly more likely to report high levels of national attitudes (i.e. stronger identification with Australian identity), concern about gender equality within the Muslim community, less concern about equality generally and report that Muslims were not conforming to Australian values. High prejudiced participants also scored higher in the reporting of negative media‐related beliefs, were more likely to perceive higher support in the community for their views than was the case and were more negative towards Muslim men than Muslim women. The implications for anti‐prejudice interventions are discussed. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Prejudice as Viciousness: Marie de Gournay and Anton Wilhelm Amo

Marie de Gournay and Anton Wilhelm Amo, though thinking and writing in different social contexts, each offer an account of prejudice which bears a deep philosophical resonance to that of the other. This resonance is striking and mutually illuminating: Gournay and Amo develop a view of prejudice as a kind of epistemic and moral viciousness that damages both the prejudicial person and their socio-epistemic neighbors. Their accounts highlight how agents are rightly held responsible for prejudice, as it is the agents' epistemic negligence and moral failure that allows prejudice to take hold. As such, their view offers a balance between a critical examination of individuals and an acknowledgement of the deep sociality that pervades the epistemic domain.     

Women's reactions to discrimination from members of the same or opposite sex

The effects upon women's self-evaluations of experiencing varying severity of failure in interpersonal competition against male vs. female opponents were explored. The results supported the hypothesis that self-esteem in women is more vulnerable to interpersonal rejection from men as opposed to other women. Specifically, subjects reported lower self-esteem when severe failure was due to the actions of alleged, male opponents rather than female ones. Also, severe failure elicited less favorable self-evaluations than mild failure only when the female subjects confronted male opponents. Finally, contrary to a defensive self-presentation hypothesis, subjects did not respond to discrimination from men by presenting themselves as being discrepant from the stereotype of women. Instead, subjects who interpreted their failure as reflecting prejudice on the part of men evaluated themselves more favorably on positive traits underlying the female stereotype.     

Ironic effects of antiprejudice messages: how motivational interventions can reduce (but also increase) prejudice

Although prejudice-reduction policies and interventions abound, is it possible that some of them result in the precise opposite of their intended effect--an increase in prejudice? We examined this question by exploring the impact of motivation-based prejudice-reduction interventions and assessing whether certain popular practices might in fact increase prejudice. In two experiments, participants received detailed information on, or were primed with, the goal of prejudice reduction; the information and primes either encouraged autonomous motivation to regulate prejudice or emphasized the societal requirement to control prejudice. Ironically, motivating people to reduce prejudice by emphasizing external control produced more explicit and implicit prejudice than did not intervening at all. Conversely, participants in whom autonomous motivation to regulate prejudice was induced displayed less explicit and implicit prejudice compared with no-treatment control participants. We outline strategies for effectively reducing prejudice and discuss the detrimental consequences of enforcing antiprejudice standards.     

Whites' ethnocentrism and their attributions for the behavior of blacks: A motivational bias1

Previous research has shown that people make more derogatory attributions for the behavior of outgroup members than for the behavior of ingroup members. However, these results may be due merely to a cultural stereotype of the outgroup rather than to ethnocentrism (which would entail dislike for members of the outgroup). To examine the effect of ethnocentrism on attributions, irrespective of the cultural stereotype, and to examine whether people who differ in ethnocentrism also differ in their attributions for whites and blacks, high and low ethnocentric whites made attributions for the success and failure of black and white actors on a task which required an ability that was outside the scope of the cultural stereotype of blacks, i.e., ESP ability. Examination of these attributions revealed that the more ethnocentric the subjects were, the more they tended to give whites greater credit for success than blacks, and the more they tended to give whites less blame for failure than blacks. These results were discussed in terms of their implications for the persistence of prejudice and for the effects of motivations on attributions for the behavior of others.     

When prototypicality makes ‘maybes’ look more certain: Another look at targets' vigilance towards prejudice cues

In previous research, targets' sensitivity to prejudice cues has been assessed on the basis of two types of information. Prototypical information renders the situation representative of discrimination encountered by the ingroup. Diagnostic information is a direct indication that prejudice possibly is operating in a given situation. We hypothesize that, when available and processed at the onset of an evaluation situation, prototypical information shapes targets' understanding of subsequent diagnostic information. In three experiments, participants were informed that they were to be evaluated by relevant outgroup members either before or after having performed a task. Diagnostic information was always provided at the same moment, i.e. after the task was completed, and was either uncertain (prejudice may bias the evaluation) or certain (prejudice certainly biases the evaluation). In the before condition, attributions to prejudice were as elevated whatever participants were told that prejudice might, or certainly did, bias the evaluation. Furthermore, in the case of uncertain diagnostic information, those who were readily informed of the evaluator(s)' identity attributed their failure to prejudice to a greater extent than those who received this information later. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Looking at others through implicitly or explicitly prejudiced eyes

It is well known that we utilize internalized representations (or schemas) to direct our eyes when exploring visual stimuli. Interestingly, our schemas for human faces are known to reflect systematic differences that are consistent with one's level of racial prejudice. However, whether one's level or type of racial prejudice can differentially regulate how we visually explore faces that are the target of prejudice is currently unknown. Here, White participants varying in their level of implicit or explicit prejudice viewed Black faces and White faces (with the latter serving as a control) while having their gaze behaviour recorded with an eye-tracker. The results show that, regardless of prejudice type (i.e., implicit or explicit), participants high in racial prejudice examine faces differently than those low in racial prejudice. Specifically, individuals high in explicit racial prejudice were more likely to fixate on the mouth region of Black faces when compared to individuals low in explicit prejudice, and exhibited less consistency in their scanning of faces irrespective of race. On the other hand, individuals high in implicit racial prejudice tended to focus on the region between the eyes, regardless of face race. It therefore seems that racial prejudice guides target-race specific patterns of looking behaviour, and may also contribute to general patterns of looking behaviour when visually exploring human faces.     

The role of intent and harm in judgments of prejudice and discrimination

Four experiments examined how an actor's intent and the harm experienced by a target influence judgments of prejudice and discrimination. The presence of intent increased the likelihood that participants judged an actor as prejudiced and the actor's behavior as discriminatory. When intent was uncertain, harm influenced judgments of the behavior, which in turn influenced judgments of the actor, and participants were more cautious in their judgments about an actor than an actor's behavior. Harm also played a stronger role in targets' than observers' judgments. Understanding the role of intent and harm on perceptions of prejudice can help explain variations in targets' versus observers', and possibly targets' versus actors', judgments of discrimination and prejudice.     

"Prejudiced" behavior without prejudice? Beliefs about the malleability of prejudice affect interracial interactions

Prejudiced behavior is typically seen as emanating from prejudiced attitudes. Eight studies showed that majority-group members' beliefs about prejudice can create seemingly "prejudiced" behaviors above and beyond prejudice measured explicitly (Study 1b) and implicitly (Study 2). Those who believed prejudice was relatively fixed, rather than malleable, were less interested in interracial interactions (Studies 1a-1d), race- or diversity-related activities (Study 1a), and activities to reduce their prejudice (Study 3). They were also more uncomfortable in interracial, but not same-race, interactions (Study 2). Study 4 manipulated beliefs about prejudice and found that a fixed belief, by heightening concerns about revealing prejudice to oneself and others, depressed interest in interracial interactions. Further, though Whites who were taught a fixed belief were more anxious and unfriendly in an interaction with a Black compared with a White individual, Whites who were taught a malleable belief were not (Study 5). Implications for reducing prejudice and improving intergroup relations are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).     

Attributions to discrimination and self-esteem: Impact of group identification and situational ambiguity

This study examined group identification and situational ambiguity as moderators of attributions to discrimination and self-esteem following negative feedback. As predicted, high gender-identified women made more discrimination attributions than low identified women when situational prejudice cues were ambiguous, but not when prejudice cues were absent or overt. Also as predicted, women exposed to overt prejudice cues had higher self-esteem than those exposed to ambiguous cues or no prejudice cues. The relationship between discrimination attributions and self-esteem was positive among women exposed to overt prejudice but negative among those exposed to no prejudice. Across conditions, however, the more that women discounted ability as a cause of their negative feedback (i.e., blamed discrimination more than ability), the higher their self-esteem. Results qualify and extend prior research and demonstrate that personal and situational factors moderate both the tendency to make attributions to discrimination and the consequences of those attributions for self-esteem.     

The Mediating Role of Information Search in the Relationship Between Prejudice and Voting Behavior

Evidence on the extent to which prejudice serves as a barrier to black and Latino candidates for office is mixed. Some research has found that black and Latino candidates are disadvantaged in terms of their chances of winning election and that they are evaluated differently by voters, while other findings suggest that this may not be the case. This article examines the effects of racial prejudice on candidate evaluation and voting behavior. It uses a unique experimental design to test for direct effects of prejudice on candidate evaluation and voting behavior, as well as indirect effects of prejudice on these variables via the information that subjects seek out. I find that subjects higher in symbolic racism are less likely to vote “correctly” when their preferences most closely align with a black or Latino candidate and that they rate minority candidates more negatively than their white counterparts. I also find that subjects high in prejudice search for less information about minority candidates and that this less robust information search mediates the relationship between prejudice and candidate evaluation and vote measures. Results also suggest that increased information search may mitigate the effects of prejudice on correct voting.     

The intergenerational transmission of need for closure underlies the transmission of authoritarianism and anti-immigrant prejudice

Previous research has identified need for closure (NFC) as an important motivational-cognitive basis of authoritarianism and prejudice. However, to date, the role of NFC in the intergenerational similarity in authoritarianism and prejudice has remained unclear. In a sample of 169 parent–child dyads, we investigated the similarity between parents and children in NFC and tested whether this intergenerational similarity may account for the intergenerational similarity in authoritarianism and anti-immigrant prejudice. Our results revealed that parental levels of NFC were indeed concordant with the levels of NFC in their children. Even more importantly, parental NFC was indirectly related to child authoritarianism and prejudice in two ways. The first pathway proceeded through the direct relationships between parental and children’s levels of authoritarianism and prejudice. The second pathway, however, bypassed parental levels of authoritarianism and prejudice and proceeded through the intergenerational similarity in NFC. Our findings thus indicate that a significant portion of children’s levels of authoritarianism and anti-immigrant prejudice can be explained by parent–child similarity in motivated cognition. Implications for developmental theories of prejudice acquisition are discussed.     

Parent–Child Similarity in Common and Specific Components of Prejudice: The Role of Ideological Attitudes and Political Discussion

Using a representative sample of Belgian adolescents (N = 1530) and both their parents, we investigated the parent–child similarity in prejudice towards different out‐groups and ideological attitudes (right‐wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation). Contrary to previous studies, first, we distinguished between common and specific components of prejudice to test whether the parent–child similarity in one specific type of prejudice was symptomatic of parent–child similarity in prejudice towards out‐groups in general. Second, we evaluated whether the parent–child similarity in common and specific components of prejudice was related to the parent–child similarity in ideological attitudes. Third, we investigated the moderating role of political discussion in the intergenerational framework of ideology and prejudice. Results indicated that parent–child similarity was particularly pronounced for the common rather than the specific component of prejudice and that the similarity in ideological attitudes was partly related to the similarity in the common component of prejudice. Finally, adolescents who discuss social and political issues more (versus less) frequently with their parents more strongly resembled their parents in the common component of prejudice and levels of authoritarianism. These results suggest that generalized prejudice runs in families and highlight politicization of the family as an important socialization mechanism. Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology     

A new threat in the air: Macroeconomic threat increases prejudice against Asian Americans

Macroeconomic conditions have long been suspected of increasing hostility toward ethnic outgroups. Integrating prior work on macroeconomic threat with recent threat-based models of prejudice, the current work employs an experimental approach to examine the implications of economic threat for prejudice toward ethnic outgroups. In Study 1, participants primed with an economic threat (relative to a non-economic threat and neutral topic) reported more prejudice against Asian Americans, an ethnic group whose stereotype implies a threat to scarce employment opportunities. In addition, economic threat led to a heightened state of anxiety, which mediated the influence of economic threat on prejudice against Asian Americans. Study 2 replicated and extended these findings by demonstrating that economic threat heightened prejudice against Asian Americans, but not Black Americans, an ethnic group whose stereotype does not imply a threat to economic resources. These findings are discussed in terms of their implications for understanding the role of macroeconomic conditions in potentiating antisocial responses to particular outgroups.     

Hispanic Prejudice in the United States

Hispanics recently became the nation's largest minority. By 2050, they will be one third of the population. As their power and influence grows, it is important to have knowledge of their prejudice. There are many studies of prejudice toward Hispanics, largely negative; but little is known about their prejudice toward others. To provide more knowledge of the subject, responses by 758 Hispanics to items about prejudice contained on nationwide surveys were analyzed. Hispanics generally preferred their own kind for marriage and as neighbors. They saw many differences between themselves and Blacks, Asians, Jews, and Whites with respect to intelligence and to being wealthy, hardworking, and prone to violence. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.     

Reducing implicit prejudice: Matching approach/avoidance strategies to contextual valence and regulatory focus

Two general strategies for reducing prejudice are to approach equality and to avoid prejudice. The current research investigated the importance of matching two factors, contextual valence and regulatory focus, on the efficacy of these two strategies in reducing implicit prejudice. The findings demonstrate that although an approach strategy is more effective in decreasing prejudice on the Implicit Association Test in a positive rather than a negative context, an avoidance strategy is more effective in decreasing prejudice in a negative rather than a positive context (Study 1). In addition, the results show that although an approach strategy is more effective in decreasing prejudice when a promotion rather than a prevention focus is primed, an avoidance strategy is more effective in reducing prejudice when a prevention rather than a promotion focus is primed (Study 2). The implications of these findings for current interventions aimed at decreasing implicit prejudice are discussed.     

Implicit and explicit prejudice in the 2008 American presidential election

The 2008 US presidential election was an unprecedented opportunity to study the role of racial prejudice in political decision making. Although explicitly expressed prejudice has declined dramatically during the last four decades, more subtle implicit forms of prejudice (which come to mind automatically and may influence behavior unintentionally) may still exist. In three surveys of representative samples of American adults, explicit and implicit prejudice were measured during the months preceding the election. Both explicit and implicit prejudice were significant predictors of later vote choice. Citizens higher in explicit prejudice were less likely to vote for Barack Obama and more likely to vote for John McCain. After controlling for explicit prejudice, citizens higher in implicit prejudice were less likely to vote for Obama, but were not more likely to vote for McCain. Instead, they were more likely to either abstain or to vote for a third-party candidate rather than Obama. The results suggest that racial prejudice may continue to influence the voting process even among people who would not endorse these attitudes.     

Putting the brakes on prejudice rebound effects: An ironic effect of disparagement humor

When people high in prejudice censor prejudice in one setting, they can experience a prejudice rebound effect—subsequently responding with more prejudice than otherwise. Disparagement humor fosters the release rather than suppression of prejudice. Thus, two experiments tested the hypothesis that exposure to disparagement humor attenuates rebound effects. Participants suppressed prejudice by writing fewer anti-gay thoughts about same-sex adoption (Experiment 1) or by reporting greater support for same-sex civil rights (Experiment 2) when expecting to share their responses with others (non-prejudice norm condition) but not if others first exchanged anti-gay jokes (prejudice norm condition). High-prejudice participants then exhibited prejudice rebound in the non-prejudice norm condition only. They rated a gay man more stereotypically (Experiment 1) and allocated greater budget cuts to a gay student organization (Experiment 2) in the non-prejudice norm condition.