Social Psychology, Prejudice

What is prejudice?
Making judgements about someone based on their membership of a group rather than their individual nature.
1 of 65
What is discrimination?
Treating people differently according to their group membership.
2 of 65
What are the 3 elements of prejudice?
Cognitive, affective, behavioural.
3 of 65
What is the cognitive element?
Beliefs/steriotypes about a group.
4 of 65
What is the affective element?
Feelings experienced in response to a group/
5 of 65
What is the behavioural element?
Actions towards the object of prejudice.
6 of 65
What study did Jane Elliot carry out and when?
The 'blue eyes, brown eyes' study, 1970.
7 of 65
What was the aim of her study?
To show that once groups have been formed and steriotypes/favouritism has been put in place, anyone can become prejudice towards the out group.
8 of 65
Who participated in her study?
Her third grade class of 1970.
9 of 65
What happened in her study?
She seperated her class based on eye colour and gave the 'inferior' eye coloured group a collar to wear. She set rules as to what the 'inferiors' couldn't do and what the 'superiors' could do. The roles were swapped on the second day.
10 of 65
Who studied social identity theory and when?
Tajfel, 1970.
11 of 65
What does social identity theory state?
That the simple act of being grouped will inevitably lead to prejudice against another group.
12 of 65
What are the 3 stages of social identity theory?
Social categorisation, social identifiation, social comparison.
13 of 65
What is social categorisation?
The automatic act of putting yourself into a group.
14 of 65
What is social identification?
Absorbing the culture of that group and having it become part of your social identity. Your self-esteem becomes 'bound up' in the group.
15 of 65
What is social comparison?
Making your group appear better than the outgroup to boost your self esteem. Ingroup favouritism/outgroup denigration.
16 of 65
Who studied a badly performing hockey team and when?
Lalonde, 1992.
17 of 65
Why did Lalonde study the hockey team?
Because the team knew the other teams were better but claimed their tactics were 'dirty', so the ingroup claimed mortal superiority. The other team weren't dirty and he found ingroup bias.
18 of 65
Who did the Robber's Cave study and when?
Sherif, 1954/1966.
19 of 65
What research method was used?
Field experiment (natural environment with controlled situations).
20 of 65
Where did the study take place?
Robber's Cave State Park, Oklahoma, USA.
21 of 65
What 5 characteristics are expected in a well established group?
Norms, values, roles, social heirarchy, leaders.
22 of 65
Give 5 details about the participants.
Boys, aged 11, protestant, middle-class, didn't know each other before the study.
23 of 65
Give 2 criteria used when matching the groups?
IQ and sporting ability.
24 of 65
Give one reason why the study could be considered unethical.
Participants and their families were decieved as they weren't told the aims of the study.
25 of 65
Name one type of qualitiative data collected.
An observer was assigned to each group to watch them for 12 hours a day/
26 of 65
Give one type of quantitative data collected.
Percentages of friends from the outgroup were recorded at the end of stages 2 and 3.
27 of 65
What was the purpose of stage 1?
To allow each group to develop their own norms and culture and to develop a heirarchy within the group.
28 of 65
Name two competitions that happened in stage 2.
Touch-football, baseball.
29 of 65
Name one way in which frustration was increased.
Telling the groups to go to a picnic but having it so one ended up late and the food was all gone.
30 of 65
Name 3 behaviours which demonstrated outfroup hostility.
Name-calling, burning the flag, steaing personal possessions.
31 of 65
Name 2 behaviours which demonstrated ingroup favouritism.
Choosing friends within the ingroup, over-estimation the ingroup's abilities.
32 of 65
Name one way which the experiment found to be ineffective in reducing prejudice.
Increasing contact between groups.
33 of 65
Name 3 superordinate goals used in the experiment.
Fixing the water supply, paying for the movie equally, using rope to pull the truck.
34 of 65
How do we know the first 2 superordinate goals were ineffective?
In the dining room after fixing the water supply there was still some name-calling & during the movie the groups sat seperatley.
35 of 65
What percentage of friendships were drawn from the outgroup in stage 2 for both groups?
Rattlers = 6.4%, Eagles = 7.5%.
36 of 65
What percentage of friendships were drawn from the outgroup in stage 3 for both groups?
Rattlers = 36.4%, Eagles = 23.2%.
37 of 65
What happened at the end of the study?
The boys became friends and asked to leave on the same bus.
38 of 65
What happened in the British Boy Scout replication and how does this affect the results of Sherif's study?
Unable to create intergroup hostility which suggests that well-established scouts' social norm of cooperation was largely unaffected by the manipulations.
39 of 65
Who carried out the Sherif replication and when?
Tyerman and Spencer, 1983.
40 of 65
What does the term ethnocentric mean?
Bias towards the target population.
41 of 65
Who studied realistic conflict theory and when?
Sherif, 1966.
42 of 65
What are the key features of relaistic conflict theory?
Competition, negative interdependence situation, rewards, zero sum situations, superordinate goals.
43 of 65
What is meant by negative interdependence situation?
Where there is real conflict of interests as the goal is important to both groups but only one can win, causing hostility towards the outgroup.
44 of 65
What is meant by zero sum situation?
Where the source of conflict is physical (e.g. land) and only one group can win, resulting in much fiercer conflict.
45 of 65
What are superordinate goals?
Goals that will benefit both groups to relieve differences.
46 of 65
What situational factors affect prejudice?
Social norms, social threat, conflict, in/outgroups.
47 of 65
How do social norms affect prejudice?
Conforming to social norms means adopting certain behaviours held by a particular group in society.
48 of 65
How does social threat affect prejudice?
Environmental factors (e.g. war/land/jobs) cause prejudice towards others.
49 of 65
How does conflict affect prejudice?
When competition is introduced outgroup hostility increases which causes conflict between groups.
50 of 65
What evidence is there for conflic affecting prejudice?
Sherif's realistic conflict theroy (1966) and Sherif's Robber's Cave study (1954).
51 of 65
Evaluate Sherif's study and theory in relation to prejudice.
They can be applied to real life as there is high ecologcal validity (though low generalisability).
52 of 65
How do in/outgroups affect prejudice?
When groups are introduced to each other, ingroup silidarity and outgroup hostility increase.
53 of 65
What evidence is there for in/outgroups affecting prejudice?
Sherif's Robber's Cave study (1954) and Jane Elliot's Blue Eyes/Brown Eyes syudy (1970).
54 of 65
Evaluate Sherif's study and Jane Elliot's study in relation to prejudice.
Both have high ecological validity so can be applied to real life.
55 of 65
What individual differences affect prejudice?
Authoritarian personality, right-wing authoritarian personality, culture.
56 of 65
How does authoritarian personality affect prejudice?
People with an authoritarian personality tend to be hostile to those of inferior status, but obediet to those of authority.
57 of 65
What evidence is there for authoritarian personality affecting prejudice?
Adorno et al. (1950) piloted a questionaire called the F-scale, and Adorno argued that those sensitive to totalitarian and antidemocratic ideas will be more prejudicial.
58 of 65
Evaluate Adorno et al's. questionaire in relation to prejudice.
People tend to lie on questionaires so they're not accurate (correlational research), and questionaires are also limited in terms of what thet can 'diagnose'.
59 of 65
How does right-wing authoritarian personality affect prejudice?
It links to political focus and has been found to predict prejudice and discrimination.
60 of 65
What evidence is there for right-wing authoritarian personality affecting prejudice?
Cohrs (2012) looked at the link between right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance and found that wight-wing authoritarianism correlates positivley with prejudice and negatively with openness.
61 of 65
Evaluate Cohrs' research in relation to prejudice.
The positive correlation between right-wing authoritarianism and prejudice shows that the more right-wing a person's views are, the more prejudice they are likely to be.
62 of 65
How does cluture affect prejudice?
Prejudice is more likely to be observed amongst collectivists that individualists as collectivists are connected via groups in society, making outgroup hostility more likely amongst them.
63 of 65
What evidence is there for culture affecting prejudice?
Becker (2012) compared the attitudes of 21 different cultural groups and found that the cultural norms were more influential than an individuals personal beliefs.
64 of 65
Evaluate Becker's research in relation to prejudice.
Not every person within a culture will believe the same things so not everyone within certain cultures will be prejudiced.
65 of 65

Other cards in this set

Card 2


What is discrimination?


Treating people differently according to their group membership.

Card 3


What are the 3 elements of prejudice?


Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4


What is the cognitive element?


Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5


What is the affective element?


Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards


No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Prejudice resources »