Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Sam Gaertner University of Delaware From Aversive Racism to the Common Ingroup Identity Model.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Sam Gaertner University of Delaware From Aversive Racism to the Common Ingroup Identity Model."— Presentation transcript:

1 Sam Gaertner University of Delaware From Aversive Racism to the Common Ingroup Identity Model

2 Prejudice Can exist among well-intentioned people with liberal, egalitarian values and non-prejudiced self-images. Can involve unacknowledged negative feelings (anxiety, uneasiness) about outgroups as well as more acknowledged positive feelings about ingroups (see Meertens and Pettigrew) and beliefs about ingroup superiority over people in other groups. Can function automatically, without intention such that people are not aware that they are discriminating.

3 Prejudice Can also exist among ill-intentioned people who represent the open flame of intergroup conflict and hatred. But the focus today is on Prejudice among the more well-intentioned who are AVERSE to racism and sexism especially their own BUT who have not completely escaped cultural, cognitive and motivational forces.

4 Motivation in Intergroup situations Don’t think bad thoughts Don’t have bad feelings Don’t behave improperly (Don’t Discriminate) A costly strategy Interaction + Rebound Avoid Acting Inappropriately i.e., in prejudicial ways

5 People Can DISCRIMINATE In subtle, unintentional, rationalizable ways that preclude them from recognizing that they discriminated.

6 Predictions: No discrimination In situations that have clear social norms to guide behavior. Discrimination is more likely to occur: When social norms are weak or ambiguous. When factors other race or sex unintentionally can be used to rationalize unfavorable behavior.

7 “ Sorry, Wrong Number ” Study Calls to Liberal and Conservative Party Members 1970 “Hello, Ralph’s Garage. This is George (or Mrs.) Williams and I’m stuck out here on the parkway.” When norms are STRONG and When norms are WEAK “Sorry, you got the wrong number…this isn’t a garage.” Predictions:

8

9

10 When Social Norms Are Strong

11 When Social Norms Are Weak

12 Subtle Anti-Semitism?

13

14 A Test of the Normative Structure Hypothesis When norms (to help) are weak -- DISCRIMINATION When norms (to help) are Strong – NO DISCRIMINATION That is, Whites would NOT discriminate when a failure to help would be inappropriate What if someone needs help because: A) She chose to play rather than work B) She was working, but she had a very difficult task In which instance are the norms to help stronger?

15 Why is help needed – and who asks for help? Partner Playing Rather than Working Difficult Task

16 Why is help needed – and who asks for help? Partner Playing Rather than Working Difficult Task

17 Accepting or Asking For Help Reversal – Participant Needs Help And He Has a Black or White Partner

18 Accepting or Asking For Help Reversal – Participant Needs Help And He Has a Black or White Partner

19 Presence of Other Bystanders : A non-race related reason to remain inactive?

20

21

22 Discrimination In Employment Decisions Subtle attitudes can affect how qualifications are perceived and weighted in a manner that disadvantages minority applicants No Discrimination when Black or White candidates’ qualifications are clearly strong or clearly weak Predictions: Discrimination when candidates’ qualifications are moderate or ambiguous

23 Study 1: Aversive Racism and Selection Decisions Percentage of students recommending a Black and White candidate for a peer counseling position QualificationsStrongModerateWeak Self Descriptions Leadership Experience Advice to Pregnant Student Sensitive Intelligent Relaxed Captain Swim Team In High School And Member of Disciplinary Board Explain options and Ask if she wants # Of Health Center Sensitive Intelligent Emotional Co-Captain Swim Team In High School Ask if she wants # Of Health Center Independent Forthright Intense Co-Captain Chess Team In High School It’s too personal and She must talk with her parents Dovidio & Gaertner, 2000

24 Study 1: Subtle Discrimination and Selection Decisions: Percentage of students recommending a Black and White candidate for a peer counseling position Percentage of students recommending a Black and White candidate for a peer counseling position

25 Subtle Discrimination in Selection Decisions: 1989 and 1999

26 Prejudice of College Students Today Given the social climate on college campuses today even higher prejudice- scoring students may be concerned about viewing themselves as prejudiced. Relative to the general population, these higher prejudiced scoring college students, may actually be low to moderate in prejudice. White College Students General Population Feelings Thermometer Favorability towards Blacks Mean = 71Mean = 63 p < = Very Favorable

27 Credentials: SAT Scores Grades Study 2: Black and White Applicants to College Strong QualificationsHigh _____ Weak Qualifications Low _____ Ambiguous Qualifications HighLow High _____ Mixed or or Ambiguous Qualifications HighLow High _____ Hodson, Dovidio & Gaertner (2002)

28 Subtle Prejudice among College Students College Admission Decisions % who recommended admission Higher Prejudice Scorers – who see themselves as non prejudiced

29 Grades SAT High Low % who recommended admission Admission Decisions: White Candidates Receive the Benefit of the Doubt When Credentials Are Mixed or Ambiguous High Low

30 Did people weigh the admission criteria in a manner that disadvantaged the Black Candidate? When Credentials Were Ambiguous

31 Grades SAT High Low How important are SAT scores and Grades for College Admission Decisions? Black Candidates Low High Rank order in importance

32 Is Resistance to Affirmative Action Subtle Racism? Is this objection to affirmative action -- Myth or Reality? “The problem with AFFIRMATIVE ACTION is that Blacks and other minorities (perhaps even an MBA or Geologist :) with lower ability will be hired, or worse, become my supervisor.” If this is Reality – then people should respond unfavorably to Black supervisors who are lower in ability than themselves -- But respond favorably to Black supervisors who are higher in ability than themselves

33 So we designed an experiment to find out? We arranged for White male college students to interact with: A Black or White male Partner who became their Supervisor or their Worker and who had either Higher or Lower job related ability than themselves. Then we measured these students’ reactions to these situations Pencils are not only for writing.

34 Is Resistance to AA based primarily on Race, Role, or Ability?

35

36 Suggests: Resistance to AA based on Race and Role – Not Ability

37

38 How can we reduce this form of bias? How can we bring behavior into alignment with non-prejudiced Self–images? We believe that awareness or consideration of these subtle biases is an important FIRST STEP to eliminate such biases. Leaders who are aware of their potential for discrimination in recruitment, hiring and promotion may be less likely to discriminate when making such decisions.

39 How can we reduce this form of bias? How can we create a connection to outgroup members How can we bring people’s behavior into alignment with their non-prejudiced Self–images?

40 neighborhood INDIVIDUAL GROUP family city nation race humanity Tajfel’s Identity Continuum and Allport’s Circles of Inclusion

41 An Experiment : What if members of two groups conceived of themselves as: One Group Two Groups Separate Individuals Predictions or “The attractiveness of an individual is not constant, but varies with ingroup membership” (Turner, et al., 1987).

42 Two Groups Self Positive Evaluation +++

43 One Group Self Positive Evaluation +++

44 One Group Self Positive Evaluation +++

45 One Group Self Positive Evaluation +++

46 One Group Self Positive Evaluation +++

47 One Group Positive Evaluation +++ Self

48 One Group Positive Evaluation +++ Self

49 Two Groups Self Positive Evaluation +++

50 Separate Individuals Self Positive Evaluation +++

51 Separate Individuals Self Positive Evaluation +++

52 Separate Individuals Self Positive Evaluation +++

53 Separate Individuals Self Positive Evaluation +++

54 Separate Individuals Self Positive Evaluation +++

55 Separate Individuals Self Positive Evaluation +++

56 Separate Individuals Self Positive Evaluation +++

57 Separate Individuals Self Positive Evaluation +++

58 video A AA B B B a a a b b b One Group Delaware “The Ramboettes and the Lost-in-the-Woods are merged together to Become the Stars.”

59 video A AA B B B a a a b b b Two Groups “The Ramboettes and the Lost-in-the-Wodds”

60 video A AA B B B a a a b b b Separate Individuals

61 Toward Reducing Bias

62 Changing Perceptions of Group Boundaries With 9 and 10-year-old Portuguese Black and White Children Rebelo, Guerra and Monteiro (2004) ISCTE: Lisbon, Portugal

63 What factors increase the inclusiveness of group boundaries?

64 Contact Conditions Cooperation Equal Status Self-Revealing Interactions Egalitarian Norms More Positive Beliefs Feelings Behaviors Toward Outgroup members Favorable Contact Conditions lead to more positive attitudes toward outgroup members – but how psychologically does this happen? The Contact Hypothesis ?

65 One Group Re-categorization One Group Composed of Two Subgroups Re-categorization (us & them) = WE WE Two Groups Categorization Us & Them Individuals Contact Conditions Cooperation Equal Status Self-Revealing Interactions Egalitarian Norms More Positive Beliefs Feelings Behaviors Toward Outgroup Members The Common Ingroup Identity Model and the Contact Hypothesis CausesMediatorsConsequences Me & You Dual Identity

66 One Group Re-categorization One Group Composed of Two Subgroups Re-categorization (us & them) = WE WE Two Groups Categorization Us & Them Individuals Contact Conditions Cooperation* Equal Status Self-Revealing Interactions Egalitarian Norms More Positive Beliefs Feelings Behaviors Toward Outgroup Members The Common Ingroup Identity Model and the Contact Hypothesis CausesMediatorsConsequences Me & You Dual Identity

67 No Cooperation Cooperation One Two One Two Group Groups Group Groups How does cooperation reduce bias?

68 No Cooperation One Two Group Groups

69 How much does it feel like one group (1 – 7) two groups, separate individuals? How much do you like (1 – 7) each person. How trustworthy, similar to self, valuable?

70 video A AA B B B a a a b b b Two Groups: “The Ramboettes and the Lost-in-the-Woods” No Cooperation

71 video A AA B B B a a a b b b One Group: Delaware “The Ramboettes and the Lost-in-the-Woods are merged together to Become the Stars.” No Cooperation

72 No Cooperation Cooperation Two Two Groups Groups If it would otherwise be TWO GROUPS --- what does Cooperative Interaction DO?

73 One Group Re-categorization WE Cooperation NO YES More Positive Evaluation of Outgroup Members.69 The Common Ingroup Identity Model and the Contact Hypothesis CausesMediatorsConsequences

74 One Group Re-categorization One Group Composed of Two Subgroups Re-categorization (us & them) = WE WE Two Groups Categorization Us & Them Individuals Contact Conditions Cooperation Equal Status Self-Revealing Interactions Egalitarian Norms More Positive Beliefs Feelings Behaviors Toward Outgroup Members The Common Ingroup Identity Model and the Contact Hypothesis CausesMediatorsConsequences Me & You Dual Identity Survey Studies

75 A Laboratory Experiment Can a common ingroup identity change inter-racial evaluations and behavior? IndividualsSame Team

76 Common Team Membership and Evaluation White Partner Black Partner Individuals Evaluation Same Team

77 A (Football) Field Experiment Fans (primarily White) From Westchester State University University of Delaware Surveyor’s Race Black White University Affiliation WSU Hat U of D Hat WSU Hat U of D Hat

78 A (Football) Field Experiment White Interviewer Black Interviewer Different University Agree to Be Surveyed 65% 60% 55% 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% Same University

79 Can Common Ingroup Identity change the Motivational Orientation toward Racial Outgroup members? From : Don’t Do Wrong (Aversive Racism) Stereotype Suppression After Suppression: Stereotype Rebound, i.e., greater accessibility of negative relative to positive thoughts. To : DO Right No Suppression No Rebound

80 Stroop Color-Naming Task Premise: The more available the meaning of the word the more interference it creates, and thus the longer it takes to recognize the color the word is printed in.

81 IS THE WORD PRINTED IN RED OR YELLOW? Stroop Test is Administered – BEFORE and AFTER the experiment

82 LAZY

83 SMART

84 GOOD

85 HOSTILE

86 Do The Right Thing: Benefits of a Common Ingroup Identity Motivational Instructions Avoid Do Same No Doing Wrong Right Team Instructions

87 Avoid Do Same No Wrong Right Team Instructions (-) Words More Available (+) Words More Available

88 Avoid Do Same No Wrong Right Team Instructions (-) Words More Available (+) Words More Available

89 Can the principle of a more inclusive common identity have utility in the REAL WORLD? Cooperative Learning Green Circle

90 GREEN CIRCLE: ELEMENTARY SCHOOL INTERVENTION A GREEN CIRCLE facilitator usually pays four visits to each class for 40 minutes per visit over a four week period. Guiding Assumption: Helping children bring people from different groups conceptually into their own circle of caring and sharing fosters appreciation of their common humanity as well as appreciation of group differences. This program seems theoretically complementary to the Common Ingroup Identity Model. An Evaluation + Test of the Theory Goals: Inclusion, self-esteem, similarities & differences, conflict resolution, decision making, feelings of empathy. Delaware Region, National Conference for Community and Justice

91 School Intervention: “Green Circle is a program that’s about you, people, the feelings we all have, and ways we are alike and ways we are different.” “Whenever you see the Green Circle, I want you to think about your world of people. The people you care about and the people who care about you.” “This figure stands for the important person in your world of caring and sharing. This figure is YOU.” “You each have the big job of deciding who’s going to be in your circle, how you treat people, and how big your circle will grow.”

92 “Now let’s talk about some of the people you may have included in your circle……” “These figures represent your family..those who live with you and those who live in other places” “How many of you have brothers? Sisters? How many of you live with your Grandmother? Grandfather?” “How many of you have a Step-mother? Step-father? Step-sister?” “Look! What has happened to your circle? It’s too small.”

93 “It needs to grow. Yes, your circle grows when you care about people. Here you are with your family.”

94 “Since you know how it feels to be outside the circle, perhaps you can understand how other people feel when they are outside the circle.” “Think about a time when you felt outside the circle ….. how did you feel?”

95 “One way people are different is their size and shape. Have you ever felt outside the circle because of your size or shape? Have you ever been called a name because of your size or shape (e.g., fatso)?” “Each of us has a skin color that is different and unique. Have you ever been treated differently because your skin color is different?” “Some of us are girls and some of us are boys. Have you ever been told you can’t do something because you’re a girl…or a boy?”

96 “All of us belong to one family – the human family.”

97 Pre TestInterventionPost Test Evaluation Design 899 1st and 2 rd Grade children in 61 classes in 10 Elementary Schools in 3 school districts XXX X X 764 Children in 52 Classes 35 Reg. 17 Enhanced 135 Children in 9 classes Control Condition Regular & Enhanced Control

98 Sample Characteristics 60% White 30% Black 6.0% Hispanic 2.5% Asian 1.0% American Indian.5% Other

99 Group Enhanced Condition Visual Similarity: Each child wore a vest with a green circle (front and back). Interdependence: “At the end of our visits if most of the vests are neat, everyone can keep his or hers as a gift.” Green Tape placed around the perimeter of the room encircling the class. Poster with children’s names included within a Green Circle.

100 1 Very Little 2 A Little 3 Bit More 4 A Lot 5 A Whole Lot How much does your class feel like a team ? Manipulation Check Regular = 4.37Enhanced = 4.50p =.16

101 EVALUATION SESSION Each child was given a test booklet specially prepared for him or her which identified the child’s ethnicity, gender and body size. Children were tested together in class and the session was conducted by a person who was experienced working with groups of young children. This person was unaware that some classes received the Regular and others the Group Enhanced version of the Green Circle Program. 85% of eligible children’s parents provided informed consent for their children to participate.

102 EVALUATION SESSION Each child was given a test booklet specially prepared for him or her which identified the child’s ethnicity, gender and body size. Children were tested together in class and the session.

103

104 very sad a little sad not sad or happy a little happy very happy How would you feel about playing with this child who is the same age as yourself? 8 drawings are shown that vary: Race, Gender, and Body Size

105 Which child would you most like to play with?

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114 very sad a little sad not sad or happy a little happy very happy How would you feel about playing with this child who is the same age as yourself? 8 drawings are shown that vary: Race, Gender, and Body Size

115 Sharing

116 very sad a little sad not sad or happy a little happy very happy How would you feel about playing with this child who is the same age as yourself? 8 drawings are shown that vary: Race, Gender, and Body Size

117 Which child would you most like to play with?

118 Assume that I am a seven year old, white, average weight boy, how many characteristics in terms of Race, Gender and Body Size do I have in common with this Child? ZERO – In this regard we are very different

119 How many of these characteristics do I have in common with this child? THREE. In this regard, we are very similar. Scores can range from 0 – 3 characteristics in common

120 ns p <.025 ns

121 Benefits of a Common Ingroup Identity Increased positive thoughts, feelings and behaviors toward outgroup members (including racial outgroup members). Appears to change the motivational orientation toward racial outgroup members from “Avoid Wrong-doing” to “Do Right.” After Green Circle, children were more willing to consider a child different than themselves in ethnicity and gender as the child they would most want to play with (effect size r =.37). The effects of Common Ingroup Identity are robust across laboratory and natural groups, across people of different ages, in different countries. And -- the effects seem to generalize to the outgroup as a whole and across time

122 Future Plans 1.Understand the conflicting evidence regarding the dual identity representation. 2. Understand the relation between the one group and dual identity representations and attitudes among racial majority and minority students. 3. Extend the Common Ingroup Identity work into applied settings including the doctor-patient relationship – as well as continue our work with the school intervention programs.

123 Collaborators: Phyllis Anastasio Betty Bachman Brenda Banker Stacy Direso Jack Dovidio Cheryl Drout David Frey Rita Guerra Missy Houlette Kelly Johnson Marika Lamoreaux Jeffrey Mann Eric Mania Maria Benedicta Monteiro Audrey Murrell Jason Nier Margarida Rebelo Blake Riek Mary Rust Bruce Sterling Christine Ward


Download ppt "Sam Gaertner University of Delaware From Aversive Racism to the Common Ingroup Identity Model."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google