Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Prejudice: Explanations - Coggle Diagram

- - - - 48 boys from a school in Bristol, divided into 3 groups, were shown 12 slides showing Klee and Kandinsky paintings, not told which was which and were asked to indicate their preference, categorised by their preference for paintings. They had to allocate points to each other (converted into money). The matrix demonstrates whether boys reward their own group or the other group, and penalised their own group or the other group.
    - - They found that the boys consistently rewarded their own group, ignoring the fair alternative, therefore demonstrating in-group favouritism, regardless of the fact that the boys had no idea who was in their own group or indeed the other group.
        
        In fact, the boys failed to maximise their own profit in order to ensure that the other group was sufficiently penalised.
    - - To investigate the minimal conditions in which prejudice and discrimination can occur between groups, without any element of competition.
    - - This findings demonstrate that categorisation into groups produces in-group faviouritism and discrimination towards the out-group.
  - - - RCT states that prejudice arises due to competition over scarce resources such as jobs, food, land or money. This goes against SIT as conflict does need to be present for prejudice to arise.
    - - Teams in schools may not be a good idea given the side effects of discrimination found in Tajfel's studies. If we know how prejudice arises, we can tackle this by merging in and out-groups i.e. changing their group boundaries
    - - SIT underestimates the importance of individual differences, some people have a much greater tendency than others to favour in-group over out-group, depending on their personality.
    - - It is hard to test whether someone is prejudiced or not, as it is a thought/ feeling. A further problem is that in Tajfel's studies the boys did not see the importance of the task because they were already a group. The boys may not have taken the task seriously, therefore the studies lack validity as the tasks lack mundane realism, This undermines the support for SIT.
    - - Tajfel's studies on minimal groups; Sherif's Robber's Cave study provides evidence for SIT in that the two groups showed prejudice before competition was introduced, and showed in-group favouritism.
  - - - We identify with groups that we perceive ourselves to belong to. Our group membership is part of our social identity. As a member of a group, we take on aspects of the group identity as our own, such as taking on the group's norms of behaviour.
    - - A positive self-concept is part of normal psychological functioning This is achieved by 2 processes; in-group favouritism and negative out-group bias. In order to boost self-esteem, we are motivated to see the in-group as better than the out-group. we put the out-group down to make ourselves feel better. This social comparison ensures that the social identity of the group is elevated, but it can lead to prejudice.
    - - We categorise people in order to understand them. We all automatically categorise ourselves and others as members of various social groups. Groups we beling to are our in-group, groups we don't belong to are out-group.
- - - - Robber's Cave Experiment
        
        Sherif conducted a series of boys' summer camp experiments, one of which, known as the Robber's Cave Experiment, formed the basis of his realistic conflict theory. He found that if he introduced competition between boys in summer camp, Realistic Conflict Theory was created due to limited resources. Realistic group conflict is evident in society today.
        . For example, when a new group of immigrants arrive in a country, they can often be met with profound prejudice on the part of the indigenous population because they are viewed as competitors for resources such as jobs, housing and schooling.
        ¬ It results in extreme ingroup favouritism and solidarity and a marked hostility towards members of the outgroup.
        . However, when groups need to work together for a common aim (superordinate goal), there is a reduction in hostility and greater harmony between groups. Sherif believed that intergroup hostility could only be reduced by superordinate goals, where all members of each group need to cooperate in order to achieve the intended outcome.
        
        Earlier summer camp experiments involved similar aims to the Robber's Cave, to investigate the development of intergroup hostility in children. The Robber's Cave went on to investigate the reduction of prejudice. All three of these studies show how competition can give rise to intergroup conflict.
        
        SCOUT
        
        C
        
        However, Sherif criticised his own evidence.
        
        He found that evidence from his own writings about the experiments indicates that the groups of boys were becoming hostile towards each other even before the introduction of organised competitive events.
        . This suggests perhaps the presence of another group was sufficient to bring about prejudice (relating to social identity theory).
        
        S
        
        The greatest amount of evidence for realistic conflict theory comes from Sherif's own field studies on intergroup conflict, including the Robber's Cave Experiment which found that competition increased hostility between the groups.
        
        These studies are further supported by anthropological studies, which found in tribal societies intergroup hostility increases where there is competition for resources and when populations expand and land becomes in short supply, conflict and violence increase.
        . Overall, these studies are important 'real-life' evidence for prejudice, giving the theory important ecological valid support.
        
        O
        
        An alternative explanation for prejudice comes from social identity theory. This theory proposes that the presence of perception of another group can lead to prejudice.
        
        Tajfel & Turner classified groups as either an in-group to which we have a membership or an out-group which is another rival group.
        . This suggests that group membership alone, even in the absence of competition, can cause prejudice.
        
        U
        
        Real-world evidence for realistic conflict theory comes from Aronson et al (1978) who introduced cooperation in the classroom where competition was rife.
        . Using the jigsaw technique, where students were divided into small groups that had to succeed in one group task to ensure the success of the overall class project, they found that levels of competition decreased. This demonstrates that the removal of competition decreases prejudice and increases liking between class members. This was similar to the final stage of Sherif's study where boys had to cooperate to fix a water supply or pull the camp bus out of a ditch together.
        
        T
        
        For a theory to be scientifically credible, it should be possible to demonstrate that the claims of the theory are wrong, this is known as falsification.
        . RCT produces testable hypotheses, e.g. 'levels of prejudice are greater before rival groups engage in a superordinate task than afterwards', this allows disproof. This shows RCT is a scientific theory, adding credibility to this explanation of prejudice and it claims about how prejudice might be reduced.