Increasing perceived variability reduces prejudice and discrimination

We examined whether increasing individuals' perceived variability of an out-group reduces prejudice and discrimination toward its members. In a series of 4 laboratory and field experiments, we attracted participants' attention to either the homogeneity or the heterogeneity of members of an out-group, and then measured their attitudes or behaviors. Perceived variability was manipulated by making subgroups salient, by portraying the out-group members as having diverse opinions, by making salient that out-group members have different characteristics, or by asking participants to think about differences among out-group members. Prejudice and discrimination were measured in terms of self-reported attitudes, distribution of rewards, helping an out-group confederate, and evaluation of an out-group candidate in a simulated hiring decision. In all experiments, perceived variability decreased prejudice and discrimination. This effect may be due to the fact that perceived variability decreases the role of group membership in the production of attitudes and behaviors toward other individuals.     

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.     

Virtual prejudice

According to recent theorizing in social psychology, social behavior is controlled not only by reflective, but also by impulsive systems. The latter are based on associative links that may influence behavior without intent. The current study examined how prejudiced implicit associations affect physiological and automatic behavioral responses. Our native Dutch participants were immersed in a virtual environment in which they encountered virtual persons (avatars) with either White or Moroccan facial features. In line with our predictions, participants maintained more distance and showed an increase in skin conductance level when approaching Moroccan avatars as opposed to White avatars. Participants’ implicit negative associations with Moroccans moderated both effects. Moreover, evidence was found that the relation between implicit prejudice and distance effects was fully mediated by skin conductance level effects. These data demonstrate how prejudiced implicit associations may unintentionally lead to impulsive discriminatory responses.     

Social dominance orientation,prejudice, and discrimination: A new computer-based method for studying discriminatory behaviors

A number of studies have shown that the scale of social dominance orientation (SDO), used to measure the degree of preference for inequality among social groups, is a predictive measure of social and political attitudes toward stigmatized outgroups. However, the relationship between SDO and discrimination has received little attention. The main goal of this study was to assess the validity of a new computer-based method used to measure discriminatory behaviors in a laboratory setting. An additional goal was to test the mediating role of prejudice in the relation between SDO and discrimination. The results provide a first validation of this new method and demonstrate that the effect of SDO on discrimination is mediated by prejudice.     

Prediction and prejudice

Evidence that supports a theory may be available to the scientist who constructs the theory and used as a guide to that construction, or it may only be discovered in the course of testing the theory. The central claim of this essay is that information about whether the evidence was accommodated or predicted affects the rational degree of confidence one ought to have in the theory. Only when the evidence is accommodated is there some reason to believe that the theoretical system was ‘fudged’ to fit the evidence in a way that weakens support. This weakening is an objective matter, but not one that can be conclusively determined by examining the contents of the theory and its logical relationship to the evidence. Consequently, there is less reason to believe a theory on the basis of that evidence when it is known that the evidence was accommodated than there would be if it was known instead that the same evidence had been predicted.     

Prejudice and discrimination within the school psychology profession: Survey results from the committee on prejudice and discrimination,Division of School Psychology,American Psychological Association

The committee on prejudice and discrimination, Division of School Psychology, American Psychological Association, conducted a survey in order to determine whether school psychologists have (a) experienced any prejudice and/or discrimination with respect to ethnicity, gender, age, and sexual orientation in salary schedule (in primary employment and in consultative employment), in tenure status, and in publication and grant productivity rate (number of articles published in professional journals, whether they have reviewed articles for journals, amount of typical research grant received); and (b) engaged in legal and/or legislative activity around any existing prejudice or discrimination. A total of 850 surveys were sent to a random sample of approximately 2,500 members of Division 16, American Psychological Association, and the total return was 52%, with 41.2% usuable responses. The results do not in themselves indicate bias with respect to ethnicity, gender, age, or sexual orientation. The findings do, however, indicate the need for further study regarding possible prejudice and discrimination.     

Facing prejudice: implicit prejudice and the perception of facial threat

We propose that social attitudes, and in particular implicit prejudice, bias people's perceptions of the facial emotion displayed by others. To test this hypothesis, we employed a facial emotion change-detection task in which European American participants detected the offset (Study 1) or onset (Study 2) of facial anger in both Black and White targets. Higher implicit (but not explicit) prejudice was associated with a greater readiness to perceive anger in Black faces, but neither explicit nor implicit prejudice predicted anger perceptions regarding similar White faces. This pattern indicates that European Americans high in implicit racial prejudice are biased to perceive threatening affect in Black but not White faces, suggesting that the deleterious effects of stereotypes may take hold extremely early in social interaction.     

Types of high self-esteem and prejudice: how implicit self-esteem relates to ethnic discrimination among high explicit self-esteem individuals

There is increasing recognition that high self-esteem is heterogeneous. Recent research suggests that individuals who report having high self-esteem (i.e., have high explicit self-esteem) behave more defensively to the extent that they have relatively low implicit self-esteem. The current studies test whether individuals with high explicit self-esteem are more likely to discriminate ethnically, as a defensive technique, to the extent that they have relatively low implicit self-esteem. The results support this prediction. Among participants with high explicit self-esteem, all of whom were threatened by negative performance feedback, those with relatively low implicit self-esteem recommended a more severe punishment for a Native, but not a White, student who started a fist-fight. In Study 2, this pattern was not apparent for participants with relatively low explicit self-esteem.     

Mimicry reduces racial prejudice

Humans are empathic animals. We automatically match other people's motor responses, allowing us to get “under the skin” of other people. Although this perception–action-coupling—a form of motor resonance—occurs spontaneously, this happens less readily with the outgroup (vs. the ingroup) and for those high (vs. low) in prejudice. Thus, prejudice diminishes our tendency to resonate with the outgroup. Here we suggest that the reverse is also possible—that resonating with the actions of an outgroup member can reduce prejudice. We predict, in other words, that explicitly mimicking the outgroup can reduce prejudice. Participants watched a 140-second video depicting actors repeatedly reaching for and drinking from a glass of water. They passively watched a video with Black actors; watched the video and mimicked the Black actors; or watched and mimicked a video with actors from their ingroup. Participants then completed the Affect Misattribution Procedure (Payne, Cheng, Govorun, & Stewart, 2005), a measure of implicit anti-Black prejudice, and an explicit symbolic racism measure. Results indicate that the outgroup-mimicry group had similar implicit preference for Blacks and Whites, unlike the other two groups, which preferred Whites over Blacks. The outgroup-mimicry group also reported less explicit racism towards Blacks than the ingroup-mimicry group, but no less than the ingroup-observation group. Mimicking specific outgroup members, therefore, reduces implicit, and possibly explicit, bias against the outgroup more generally.     

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。