Political Psychology Final

16 questions comprise the "Social Dominance Scale." Answers can be used to calculate a "Social Dominance Orientation," a feature of personality relevant to prejudice and intergroup relations. Social Dominance Scale All individual questions on seven-point scale

(Part I: High score = higher social dominance orientation) 1. Some groups of people are just more worthy than others. 2. In getting what your group wants, it is sometimes necessary to use force against other groups. 3. Superior groups should dominate inferior groups. 4. To get ahead in life, it is sometimes necessary to step on other groups. 5. If certain groups of people stayed in their place, we would have fewer problems. 6. It is probably a good thing that certain groups are at the top and other groups are at the bottom. 7. Inferior groups should stay in their place. 8. Sometimes other groups must be kept in their place. (Part II: High score = low social dominance orientation) 9. It would be good if all groups could be equal. 10. Group equality should be our ideal. 11. All groups should be given an equal chance in life. 12. We should do what we can to equalize conditions for different groups. 13. Society is better when social equality is increased. 14. We would have fewer problems if we treated different groups more equally. 15. We should strive to make incomes more equal. 16. No one group should dominate in society. To calculate a social dominance orientation score: (1) Adjust the scales for all questions to make 7 the highest social dominance orientation and 1 the lowest (2) Take the average of responses to all questions in the scale. For people in the last version of this class, social dominance orientations were generally low to moderate

Realistic Conflict Theory (Bobo 1983)

-RCT sees prejudice/discrimination/stereotyping as a result of competition over scarce resources -Predicts individual variation: prejudice more likely in those more directly involved in competition for resources with out-group members (working-class vs upper-class whites) -Predicts across-country variation: prejudice more likely in countries where resources are scarce and competition for resources is organized around ethnic/racial groups

Implicit Associations measure Implicit attitudes

-these are very explicit and easy to understand what is going on -in discussing political hot cognition we made a distinction between automatic responses to a stimulus and slower responses that could be mediated by more conscious evaluative judgments -if worried about social desirability effects, it is problematic to measure explicit attitudes -but if we find a way of measuring implicit attitudes there may be more invulnerable to social desirability effects, because they are automatic and because respondents themselves may not be fully aware of them (may not realize they have an implicit attitude they would want to conceal) -the distinction between implicit and explicit attitudes is important for thinking about how political advertising might be effective both at unconscious and at conscious levels

"7 Social Processes That Grease the Slippery Slope of Evil"

1. Mindlessly Taking the First Small Step 2. Dehumanization of Others 3. De-individuation of Self (anonymity) 4. Diffusion of Personal Responsibility 5. Blind Obedience to Authority 6. Uncritical Conformity to Group Norms 7. Passive Tolerance of Evil Through Inaction, or Indifference

Mendelberg's Implicit Racial Appeals

1. White Americans are torn between the norm of quality and lingering resentment toward black Americans 2. Racial priming works because certain cues make racial schemas more accessible in memory 3. becoming aware of the racial content of a message would lead most people to reject it because they do not want to violate norm of quality 4. therefore racial appeals are effective only if they are not recognized as such by the audience the book suggests that where there is norm of equality any use of racial imagery that does occur must be indirect in order to be effective In the absence of a norm of equality one might expect direct explicit appeals to be used instead implicit (unstated) racial cues likely to be more effective than explicit ones

social desirability might affect responses when

1. a given social norm is salient to respondents 2. reporting a given true attitude would clearly violate a social norm These problems could be addressed by a survey that 1. does no appear to be explicitly about race and 2. allows people to answer honestly without it being evident they have violated a social norm

How Political Ads Prime Racial Attitudes (Valentino, Hutchings, and White 2002)

346 adult, nonstudent subjects recruited using flyers in summer 2000 Respondents paid $15 for watching "several television advertisements and answering questions about current events" Subjects.... (1) Filled out a demographic questionnaire (2) Viewed three advertisements (3) Performed a "lexical task" to measure the accessibility of racial attitudes in memory (4) Answered extensive post-experiment questionnaire including candidate evaluations, issue importance ratings, racial & political attitudes (5) Subjects "debriefed" about the experiment Control Group: three commercials for common products (no political ads) Subjects in the other treatment groups saw two product commercials and one political advertisement Six other treatments, divided into two categories: Implicit Race Cue Advertising (3 treatments) Counter-Stereotypic Advertising (3 treatments) The text of the narrative was the same in all of these treatments, but the visual images varied: Implicit Race Cue Advertising Treatments: Neutral Visuals Race Comparison Undeserving Blacks Hypothesis: racially coded appeals boost the explanatory power of racial attitudes on candidate evaluations Dependent Variable: Level of Support for Bush Three measures of racial attitudes (from post- test): "Racial resentment", "Laissez-Faire Racism", "Blacks Have Too Much Influence"

Personality/ Genetics and Ideology Personality predispositions appear to have some relationship with ideological preferences

A study of the political attitudes of monozygotic (identical) and dizygotic (fraternal) twins reared apart reveals that identical twins have more similar attitudes than fraternal twins. Most likely interpretation: some genetic basis underlying components of individual personality, that in turn has an effect on political attitudes/ideologies Putting it all together • Personality seems to matter for ideology and political orientations/behaviors • But so do contextual factors • Particularly when an environmental condition induces fear, this seems to be linked to people's increases conservatism

Which of the below factors does the article cite as relevant to whether or not disadvantaged group members will exhibit system justifying patterns of response?

A. Groupidentification B. Volition C. Meritocratic ideologies

In the experiment involving councilman Gregory Hammond, whites who believe that blacks prefer to live on welfare or that blacks lack the motivation to succeed were most likely to evaluate candidate Gregory Hammond negatively when he was described as African American, but only when the candidates differed on which issue?

Affirmative Action

"Analogical Reasoning"

An analogy can serve as a decision-making heuristic • The Vietnam analogy • The Munich analogy • The Guns of August analogy Shifting gears to Nationalism, Int'l Security and Conflict... • An analogy can serve as a decision-making heuristic • The Vietnam analogy o 1960s/1970s US war in Vietnam o Invoked to suggest that any US military intervention will result in an open-ended, damaging commitment to a losing cause • The Munich analogy o Munich agreement (1938) in which western powers gave Hitler permission to annex the Sudetenland (part of Czechoslovakia) in exchange for an agreement by Germany not to expand further o Invoked to suggest that attempts to appease an aggressor to keep the peace will lead to further aggression and, ultimately, war on worse terms • The Guns of August analogy o The story of how European powers who did not really want war fell step by step into WWI o Invoked to suggest that taking steps escalating a crisis can easily lead to events spiraling out of control

Extremists

An extremist is a person who is excessive and inappropriately enthusiastic and/or inappropriately concerned with significant life purposes, implying a focused and highly personalized interpretation of the world. Politically, it is behavior that is strongly controlled by ideology, where the influence of ideology is such that it excludes or attenuates other social, political, or personal forces that might be expected to control and influence behavior. • That is, extremists are concerned only with the logic of their own behavior and their ideological construction of the world - tending to disregard the lives of others or alternative ways of looking at things. • Extremists "believe what they prefer to be true", making their worldviews very resistant to change (to a greater-than-usual extent) • Dogmatic is a good word to say it's a dogmatic view of the world

Cognitive-Motivational Analysis of Political Ideology

An interpretation of what we have seen: "Ideologies have for different individuals, different degrees of appeal, a matter that depends upon the individual s needs and the degree to which these needs are being satisfied or frustrated." But this suggests that as needs change, ideological orientations can shift as well:

Zimbardo Prison Experiment (1971) Lessons

Apparently ordinary subjects strongly internalized roles as "guard" or "prisoner" in less than a week Many guards really got into carrying out degrading punishments on strangers (in less than a week), and those that did not did nothing to try to stop it Remember, guards and prisoners were randomly assigned. Visitors were sucked into the experiment and treated what was happening as normal. Even the experimenters were sucked into the experiment and began to see themselves as prison wardens rather than scientists

Social Dominance Theory (Sidanius 1993)

Claim: all human societies tend to be structured as systems of group-based social hierarchies "Dominant" group (or groups) possess disproportionate share of positive social value (material & symbolic things for which people strive) Aspects of individual personality may be key to understanding prejudicial attitudes and behavior. • Some people may have an inherent desire for social relations to be either more hierarchical or more equal • Some people may have a stronger inherent desire for their in-group to dominate out-groups Psychologists use "scales" to measure aspects of individuals' personalities Scales generally consist of a series of questions that tap into different facets of a given personality feature Psychologists then attempt to relate behavior to aspects of personality measured by the scales

Cognitive dissonance and system justification:

Cognitive dissonance researchers have demonstrated that people who are most socially and physically deprived develop the strongest needs to justify their own suffering, in order to reduce dissonance • By this logic, those who suffer the most from the system are also those who have the most to explain, justify, and rationalize • When individual and group needs and interests are low in salience or strength, members of disadvantaged groups will provide stronger support for the social system and its authorities than will members of advantaged groups. • In one study, low-income respondents and African Americans were more likely than high-income respondents and whites to support limitations on the rights of citizens and media representatives to criticize the government. • In various studies, low-income respondents were more likely than high- income respondents to believe that large differences in pay are necessary to "get people to work hard" and "as an incentive for individual effort." • This suggests: System justification levels will be higher in societies in which social and economic inequality is more extreme rather than less extreme. • Suggests reasons why inequality may tend to become entrenched when it exists

Study 5 found that African Americans were more likely than European Americans to believe that:

Economic inequality is legitimate and necessary

Bradley Effect

Historically, polling has sometimes been inaccurate in races between white and black candidates. Describes a tendency among some voters to tell pollsters they are undecided or likely to vote for the black candidate, but actually vote for the white candidate on election day. 1982 CA governor race: Tom Bradley running ahead in pool, but unexpectedly lost 1983 Chicago mayor race: Harold Washington consistently led in polls by about 14, eventually won by less than 4 Typically explained as a result of social desirability effect: because of social norms against racism, voters who oppose a candidate on racial grounds may lie to conceal their bias some believe this effect has diminished with time or even disappeared, but this is a subject of debate

Social Inequity has the capacity to create:

Ideological dissonance

Lessons

In terms of the Zimbardo slide above, highlights "blind obedience to authority" and "mindlessly taking the first small step" Milgram wrote about the results in terms of • The "theory of conformism" (remember the Asch line experiments) • "Agentic state theory," which holds that when a person comes to view himself as the instrument for carrying out another person's wishes, he no longer sees himself as responsible for his actions "Diffusion of Responsibility" Two kinds: • In hierarchical organizations, underlings claim that they were following orders, superiors claim they were just issuing directives and not doing anything per se • In a group of peers, individuals engage in activity they otherwise would never engage in alone ("groupthink"), or fail to act when they would never fail to act alone ("bystander effect")

Zimbardo Prison Experiment (1971) aka "Stanford Prison Experiment" Motivation

In the aftermath of World War II, psychologists had a great deal of interest in the social psychology surrounding acts of brutality. • Are acts of brutality committed by "evil people" who take advantage of opportunities to be sadistic? • Or are they committed by "ordinary people" who are "changed" by the circumstances of the moment? • What happens "when you put good people in an evil place? Does humanity win over evil, or does evil triumph?"

Personality

Many different definitions. A reasonable one: One's acquired, relatively enduring, yet dynamic, unique, system of predispositions to psychological and social behavior • Personalities tend to be very stable • Personalities influence behavior and predispositions on an ongoing, constant basis • Personality affects behavior and the thought process non-consciously

Out-group favoritism as a manifestation system justification

Members of low-status groups will sometimes exhibit out-group favoritism • Members of low-status groups will be more likely to exhibit out-group favoritism on implicit measures than on explicit measures • Social pressure to express in-group favoritism (on explicit measure) would be even more prevalent in groups that have traditionally been targets of discrimination and prejudice. • Similarly, members of high-status groups will be more likely to exhibit in-group favoritism on implicit measures than on explicit measures. • Due to the "norm of equality" and related phenomena • Race in the US • African Americans display stronger explicit in-group favoritism than white Americans • However, using the IAT, white Americans display strong in-group favoritism while many African American subjects display out-group favoritism • Extends to other kinds of tests than the IAT we saw in class: white and black police officers exhibited same pattern in a video simulation where officers quickly had to decide whether to "shoot" or "not shoot" white and black target persons (who might or might not be armed) • Other kinds of "status gaps": • Income. High-status = rich, low-status = poor • Weight. High-status = thin, low-status = overweight • University. High-status = Stanford, low-status = San Jose State University • In each case, with implicit measures, high-status show in-group favoritism & low-status show out-group favoritism (so everyone favors high status group implicitly) • But with explicit measures, this pattern is absent

Depressed entitlement among the disadvantaged as a manifestation of system justification

Membersofdisadvantagedgroupswillexhibitadepressed sense of entitlement relative to members of advantaged groups, even in explicitly egalitarian environments. • In influential experiments on wages (Jost 1997), women "paid themselves" on average 18% less than men did for work that was indistinguishable with regard to quality. • Used as an explanation as to why women often accept gender stereotypes and conventional definitions of sex roles • Used as an explanation as to why people who are economically disadvantaged often oppose income redistribution

Fairness Judgments (Babcock and Loewenstein 1997)

Of course psychologist have also studies fairness judgments in more real world settings In the ultimatum game a 50-50 split is a clear fair division of the money • Imagine the following scenario, involving the study of how people form judgments about the "fair" outcome of a court case: o Subjects are randomly assigned to the roles of "plaintiff" and "defendant" in a court case o Each "plaintiff" will ultimately be paired with one "defendant" o All subjects then receive an identical set of materials drawn from an actual court case (in which an injured motorcyclist plaintiff sues a car-driving defendant), including witness testimony, police reports, and so on o After reading the materials, all subjects are asked to write down: • What kind of award (if any) they think the judge gave to the motorcyclist in the "real" case • What they think the "fair" outcome of the trial would have been • Then, each "plaintiff-defendant pair" must sit down and try to negotiate a settlement to the court case o Subjects were paid depending on the settlement they reached (the "better" the position for each subject in the settlement, the more money they earned) & how long it took for a settlement to be reached (subjects had to pay a "cost" that went up as deliberations lasted longer) o Subjects had only 30 minutes to deliberate; if they could not reach a decision, they would have to settle for what the judge awarded in the real-world, and both would have to pay high "court fees" • There were systematic differences in plaintiffs' and defendants' fairness judgments. Subjects in the role of plaintiff: o Predicted that the judge gave higher awards to the motorcyclist (plaintiff) o Identified the "fair" outcome as resulting in larger payments to the plaintiff • These differences in judgments were related to "breakdowns" in bargaining: o Plaintiff-defendant pairs whose fairness judgments diverged more, were more likely to fail to reach an agreement (thereby ultimately paying high court costs, making both worse off) o Plaintiff-defendant pairs whose fairness judgments were closer tended to reach agreements relatively quickly • The researchers then ran a study closely related to the first. • Specifically, everything was done in the same way, except that the subjects only were told who would be the "plaintiff" and the "defendant" after reading the case materials (but before making their guesses and fairness judgments, and before bargaining) • What there searchers found was that the discrepancies between plaintiff and defendant guesses and fairness judgments were much reduced (about 1/3 the size as in the original experiment) • Further, only 6% of pairs failed to reach an agreement when bargaining (compared to 28% in the original experiment) • Some people argue that this phenomenon helps explain the intractability of conflicts - if different sides form fairness judgments that are biased in a "self-serving" way, this makes it harder for bargains to be struck or peace agreements to be made All concepts that go with this experiment • In-groups vs. out groups • Situation vs. dispositional attributions • Selective perception/directed information • Stereotyping

What are some ways we might measure racial attitudes that would be more invulnerable to social desirability effect?

One way is the list experimnet

Social Learning Theory

SLT focuses on the role of political socialization in maintenance of prejudice/stereotypes • Children learn & are rewarded for discriminatory behavior by prejudiced parents • Prejudice can be sustained by in-group norms Attitudes are a result of both socialization and experience; socialization of prejudice matters more for individuals with limited or negative contact with members of minority groups

During 1988 Republic campaign, an ad was aired about furloughed prisoner Willie Horton. Mendelberg found that the ad had the most impact on racial attitudes during which of the following three time periods:

Second Stage: when exposure intensified but the ad's racial message remained implicit

Milgram Obedience Experiment 1961

Setup • Participants were told they were involved in a "learning experiment" • Each participant was told that they would be a "teacher" • Each participant was told that another participant would be a "learner", but the "learner" was in fact a confederate of the experimenter (an actor) • Participants were told that learners had to perform memory tasks, and that the teacher's role was to deliver electric shocks to the learner whenever he made a mistake, as a way of improving the learner's memory • Each participant (teacher) sat in front of a machine with a number of dials representing increasing voltages, ranging from 15V to 450V. The highest voltages also had such labels as "Danger: Severe Shock" and "XXX" • Teachers were instructed to increase the voltage by one increment every time an additional mistake was made • Teachers were told that the learner was hooked up to electrodes in another room; communication was via an audio link; but the "learner" actor was not hooked up to anything • As "learners" continued to make mistakes, and voltages increased, the audio feedback included (recordings of) increasingly desperate screams of pain and exhortations to stop, until the "learner" eventually went silent • Whenever a participant baulked at delivering a shock, the experimenter (dressed in a white lab coat) ordered them to continue with escalating intensity: • Please continue. • The experiment requires that you continue. • It is absolutely essential that you continue. • You have no other choice, you must go on. • However, participants could simply stop and walk away at any time. • The experiment was stopped if a participant refused four times, or after the maximum voltage (450V) was delivered three times in succession • When subjects asked who would be liable if something happened to the learner, the experimenter said that he (the experimenter) would be Results • 63% of participants continued all the way through to the end (to the highest possible voltage) past all the screaming and begging • Most everyone questioned the experiment at some point, but most continued when prodded • Participants who refused to administer the final shocks did not demand that the experiment be halted and did not go to check on the health of the victim

Partisanship Affects Perceptions of Candidate Skin Tone Caruso, Mead, and Balcetis (2009)

Study 1: A Hypothetical Candidate • Led participants to believe that a "candidate" did or did not agree with participant's own policy views (-> "partisanship") • Took photo graphs of a biracial candidate indifferent poses • For each pose, created alternative versions of the photo in which the "candidate's" skin tone was artificially lightened or darkened, or left unchanged • Participants were shown one lightened, one unchanged, and one darkened photo (each in a different pose) • Participants were asked to evaluate the extent to which each photo was "representative" of the candidate on a scale Study 2: Obama • Measured participants' liberalism/conservatism and Democratic/Republican party ID • Took photographs of Obama indifferent poses • For each pose, created alternative versions of the photo in which Obama's skin tone was artificially lightened or darkened, or left unchanged • Participants were shown a number of lightened, unchanged, and darkened photos (each in a different pose) • Participants were asked to evaluate the extent to which each photo was "representative" of the candidate on a scale Study 1 result • Participants who believed this racially ambiguous candidate supported their views thought that lighter skin tone was more representative of him • Participants who believed this racially ambiguous candidate did not support their views

Resurgence of OFR? (Tesler 2013)

Study 1: Correlation between OFR & candidate preference in the 2008 election (Pew Survey 2008) • OFR measured by endorsement of statements saying white and black Americans should not intermarry • Diff. between highest and lowest in OFR was 10% on McCain-Clinton, but 35% on McCain-Obama • Controlling for modern racism (and ideology, party ID, etc.) Study 2: Pew Data 1987-2009, relationship between party preference and OFR • Spillover Effects? o From 1987-2007 no relationship between OFR and partisanship o In 2009 there was a sig. association between OFR and self-identified Republican • Mediated by attitudes toward Obama o When effect of evaluation of Obama is removed, association between OFR and partisanship disappears Study 3: Own survey data, asked preference for house candidates in 2010 midterms • Before stating vote preference, treated subjects reminded that Obama had been campaigning for Dem candidates, then asked whether this affected their preference Results: • Among control subjects: OFR not correlated with vote intentions in 2010 midterms • But among those who saw the Obama prime: high OFR were 13% less likely to prefer the Dem candidate than those lowest on OFR scale • Prior to 2008, OFR randomly distributed between the parties • Many were "low-information" voters and self-identified as indeps • Obama presidency (and related changes—Tea Party) seems to have driven these people into the Republican party • Since party identification tends to persist throughout the life cycle, this realignment may affect our politics long after Obama's presidency. • Tesler also predicted an increase in overtly racist rhetoric, since it is now useful in mobilizing the Republican base.

In the 2008 Pew Poll referenced in the article, moving from least to most OFR decreased Obama's vote share against McCain by more than 35 percentage points. What was the effect of OFR on Obama's ideologically similar white opponent Hillary Clinton (i.e. in the McCain-Clinton comparison, was the difference between highest and lowest OFR in predicting McCain vs. Clinton larger or smaller than the difference between highest and lowest in predicting Obama-McCain)?

The gap in support on the McCain-Obama ticket was bigger than the gap in support on the McCain-Clinton ticket

Nationalism

The nation is a community of people who feel they belong together in the double sense that they share deeply significant elements of a common heritage and that they have a common destiny for the future.... The nation is today the largest community which, when the chips are down, effectively commands...loyalty, overriding the claims both of the lesser communities within it and those which cut across it or potentially enfold it within a still greater society.... • A nation is a potentially powerful in-group • "Nationalists" are individuals who give their primary loyalty to their perceived nation • A nation-state exists when, on the whole, citizens of a country are nationalists (for the same perceived nation) • "Nations" are not necessarily co-terminus with "countries" • Some countries function as nation-states, while in others, citizens' primary political loyalties may be directed elsewhere (such as towards ethnic groups, rather than the community of the nation-state as a whole) • Typology of non-nation-states Multinational State • Several groups of people, who think of themselves as separate nations and who actually have the capacity to establish viable independent states, live together in a single country • Primary identity group is the nationality they belong to rather than the population of the country as a whole: United Kingdom and South Africa Core Community non-national-state • Countries with a dominant ethnic or sectarian community who believe that they are the primary nation embodied in the country, identify with that nation in the strongest terms, and generally control the government • Other communities, which give primary loyalty to their own ethnic groups, are also present within the territorial state. Such groups may desire independence, but would not have the capacity to establish a viable state • In many cases, the "core community" advocates the integration and assimilation of the other groups, encouraging the minorities to speak the dominant group's language, abandon their customs, etc. Spain and Turkey Nation without a state • A group of people who are physically dispersed across multiple states, in none of which they are the dominant group • Nationalists form social identities around membership in the nation • Motivated to have a strong, positive attachment to their nation • Committed to the unity, independence, dignity, and well-being of the national community • Love the nation itself even when they dislike their government Some Effects of Nationalism • Nationalists tend to be more sensitive to (perceived) threats to the nation- state, and to view the source of the threat through a more extreme image • Nationalists are also more sensitive to opportunities to advance their country's influence & are more likely to support expanding state influence at the expense of others • Nationalists are more concerned with their country's prestige and dignity than are non-nationalists, and are more willing to take action to rectify perceived affronts • Leaders of nation-states, compared to non-nation states, are better able to make effective appeals to the citizens to make sacrifices to enhance state power • The public is more willing to serve in the military and to have a more intense commitment to the defense of the state • These effects can be understood in social identity terms • Leaders of nation-states can use nationalistic symbols to arouse passionate feelings of devotion to the nation • Flag • Reference to historic events such as success in great battles • The idea of the "motherland" or "fatherland" • Nationalists respond readily to the use of such symbols, and are mobilized to achieve national goals

The role of explanations in system justification

The role of "explanations" in system justification: • Providing explanations (or pseudo-explanations) for status or power differences between groups: • Will increase the use of stereotypes to rationalize differences • Will lead members of disadvantaged groups to express more positive (relative to negative) affect concerning their situation. • Members of disadvantaged groups will misremember explanations for their powerlessness as being more legitimate than they actually were.

Racial Imagery in Political Advertisement

There can be disagreement over whether a given advertisement is racially charged or uses racial imagery

Milgram Obedience Experiment Motivation

To what extent do individuals obey an authority figure, even when they are instructed to carry on.

Genocide

UN definition: Acts committed with the intent to destroy in part or in whole a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such. Historically, tends to result from an intense feeling of frustration and threat, usually operating in the context of difficult social economic and political circumstances

Fairness Judgments

We can think of at least two distinct kinds of fairness: "Procedural fairness" • Focuses on the fairness and the transparency of the processes by which decisions are made • An institution exhibits procedural fairness when everyone with a "like case" is treated in the same way by the institution • Related concepts: "due process", "procedural justice", "equality of opportunity" "Outcome fairness" • Focuses on the fairness of the ultimate outcomes of a decision making process • Related concepts: "distributive justice", "equality of outcomes"

Stereotype

a set of beliefs about the personal attribute of a group of people

schema

a way of thinking about a general class of things, a cognitive structure that represents knowledge about a concept or type of stimulus, including its attributes and the relations among those attributes

5. Aversive sexists...

a. ...will vote for male candidates who are clearly more qualified than their female opponents. b. ...will vote for female candidates who are clearly more qualified than their male opponents.

implicit attitudes

automatic responses of which individuals may be partially or fully unaware

1. According to Mo's study, female candidates can be successful if...

b

Which of these is not a main element of Old-Fashioned Racism? a. Desire for social distance between the races? b. A moral feeling that blacks violate traditional American values c. Support of public policies insuring racial segregation and formalized discrimination d. Beliefs in the biological inferiority of blacks

b

1. In 1994 people who opposed interracial dating were more likely to be supporters of which political party?

c) None of the above

4. What is aversive sexism?

d. When an individual is implicitly sexist but explicitly egalitarian

3. True/False According to dual process theory, System 1 controls explicit, effortful processing.

false

OFR attitudes were a significant factor in support for George W. Bush's 2004 re-election bid.

false

List Experiment

in a survey experiment respondents are randomly assigned into different groups, each group is given a different survey a list experiment is a survey experiment that asks all respondents a question of the form "how many of the statements in the following list do you agree with?" but varies the statement in the list across the randomly assigned

Old-fashioned racism had a ______ effect on Democratic Candidates favorability in 2010?

negative

Situational Factors and Liberalism/Conservatism" Imagine an experimental condition (Jost, Fitzsimons, Kay 2004)

that (1) primes people with images evoking death and then (2) asks about opinions on issues (taxation, same-sex marriage, stem cell research) Relative to a control group, individuals primed with images evoking death reported more conservative positions across a wide range of issues Presidential approval ratings increased each time the US terror alert level was raised between 2001 & 2004 (Willer 2004) Subliminal 9/11 and death images led college students to show increased support for Bush & decreased support for Kerry (Landau et al 2004, Cohen et al 2005) 1. Primes people with images evoking death and then 2. Asks about opinions on political issues (taxation, same-sex marriage, stem cell research) Results: relative to control group, individuals primed with images evoking death reported more conservative positions across a wide rand of issues

What is the most basic assumption of system justification theory?

that people tend to provide cognitive and ideological support for the existing social system

explicit attitudes

the kinds of attitudes that people report in survey of which they are consciously aware

2. True/False Motivated overriding does not occur when the implicit attitude is against male candidates.

true

According to Huber & Lapinski, because they already use racial attitudes to form opinions at the baseline, educated individuals are less likely to be susceptible to racial priming than uneducated individuals

true

While there is some debate, most racial priming scholars maintain that whites reject explicit racial appeals because they clearly violate the norm of racial equality.

true

Priming

when a given consideration is brought to mind by a news report or advertisement

The Rwandan Genocide (1994)

• Between 800,000 and 1,000,000 people killed in the space of about 3 months (from a population of less than 10 million) • Rwanda has two major ethnic groups o Hutu o Tutsis Rwanda: Pre-Colonial Period • In pre-colonial times, Hutus and Tutsis lived in relative harmony: same language, same religion, economic interdependence • Non-rigid caste system, by which Tutsis were usually herders and Hutus were usually farmers • Tutsi came to mean "rich" (someone with many cows); Hutu came to mean "servant" (someone with fewer than 10 cows) • Under certain circumstances, a Hutu could become a Tutsi • Tutsi (mixed with a few Hutus) became the economic & political elite Rwanda: Colonial Period • German colony, then Belgian after WWI • Belgians chose to administer power through the Tutsi (partly because of who the pre-existing elite was, partly because Tutsis are stereotyped as having closer-to-"European" appearance: lighter skin, more aquiline features, taller) • Belgians strongly favored Tutsis in jobs and education, issued identity cards with individual ethnicities immutably recorded • Hutus came to view Tutsis as an elitist class and an arm of the colonial state • Ethnicity became politicized in a way it had not been before • Rwanda won independence in 1959; Hutus overthrew the colonizers and many Tutsis went into exile in neighboring countries (esp. Uganda) Rwanda: Under Hutu Rule • Many Tutsis lived in refugee camps for decades • Relations between Hutus and the Tutsis in Rwanda were generally bad-tempered, with intermittent violence, but not catastrophic • By the late 1980s, exiled Tutsis pressed for return to Rwanda & permanent resettlement • The Hutu government under long-time Pres. Juvenal Habyarimana said that Rwanda was already overpopulated & couldn't take the refugees back • Amid stalled negotiations, Tutsis in Uganda formed the RPF (Rwandan Patriotic Front) under Paul Kagame and began incursions into Rwanda in 1990 with an eye towards overthrowing the regime (or forcing concessions) Rwanda: early 1990s • Habyarimana (who came to power in 1973) had been losing popularity anyway • Rwanda was desperately poor; 95% of land under cultivation, genuinely overpopulated; hunger was rampant; average woman had 9 children; one of the poorest countries in the world • Habyarimana developed a strategy of playing on ethnic loyalties, emphasizing the Tutsi threat, and dividing Hutus who supported him from Tutsis and "collaborationist" Hutus ("moderate Hutus") • As part of this, anti-Tutsi sentiment and anti-Tutsi behavior was encouraged (actively or tacitly) in a variety of different ways • Media (Kangura, RTLM) • Formation of militias (Interahamwe) Kangura • Was a state-owned newspaper that launched an anti-RPF and anti-Tutsi campaign in October 1990 • Became infamous for anti-Tutsi propaganda and propagating "Hutu Power" ideology • Perhaps most famous for the Hutu was the ten commandants • Cover of Kangura, December 1993 • Top: "Tutsi: Race of God" • Next to the machete: "Which weapons are we going to use to beat the cockroaches for good?" • Pictured: Grégoire Kayib The "Hutu Ten Commandments" 1. Every Hutu should know that a Tutsi woman, whoever she is, works for the interest of her Tutsi ethnic group. As a result, we shall consider a traitor any Hutu who • Marries a Tutsi woman • Befriends a Tutsi woman • Employs a Tutsi woman as a secretary or a concubine. 2. Every Hutu should know that our Hutu daughters are more suitable and conscientious in their role as woman, wife and mother of the family. Are they not beautiful, good secretaries and more honest? 3. Hutu women, be vigilant and try to bring your husbands, brothers and sons back to reason. 4. Every Hutu should know that every Tutsi is dishonest in business. His only aim is the supremacy of his ethnic group. As a result, any Hutu who does the following is a traitor: • Makes a partnership with Tutsi in business • Invests his money or the government's money in a Tutsi enterprise • Lends or borrows money from a Tutsi • Gives favors to Tutsi in business (obtaining import licenses, bank loans, construction sites, public markets, etc.). 5. All strategic positions, political, administrative, economic, military and security should be entrusted only to Hutu. 6. The education sector (school pupils, students, teachers) must be majority Hutu. 7. The Rwandan Armed Forces should be exclusively Hutu. The experience of the October 1990 war has taught us a lesson. No member of the military shall marry a Tutsi. 8. The Hutu should stop having mercy on the Tutsi. 9. The Hutu, wherever they are, must have unity and solidarity and be concerned with the fate of their Hutu brothers. • The Hutu inside and outside Rwanda must constantly look for friends and allies for the Hutu cause, starting with their Hutu brothers. • They must constantly counteract Tutsi propaganda. • The Hutu must be firm and vigilant against their common Tutsi enemy. 10. The Social Revolution of 1959, the Referendum of 1961, and the Hutu Ideology, must be taught to every Hutu at every level. Every Hutu must spread this ideology widely. Any Hutu who persecutes his brother Hutu for having read, spread, and taught this ideology is a traitor. RTLM(Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines) (Free radio/television of the thousand hills; Rwanda known as the "Land of a Thousand Hills") • Much of the population illiterate, so radio propaganda was a crucial part of the regime's plans • Constant sensationalized stories about the threat posed by the Tutsi • RTLM repeatedly stressed the need to be alert to Tutsi plots and possible attacks and called upon Hutu to prepare to 'defend' themselves against the Tutsi • Constant warnings about how RPF combatants dressed in civilian clothes were mingling among displaced people fleeing combat zones. These broadcasts gave the impression that all Tutsi were necessarily supporters of the RPF force fighting against the government. Interahamwe • Literally, "those who work together" or "those who fight together" • A Hutu paramilitary organization set up & tacitly encouraged by the government; allowed to attack Tutsis in the population without repercussions • Began openly "rehearsing" for genocide, carrying out drills and such • Mostly poorly armed - machetes were the most common weapon held by militia members April 6, 1994 • The Habyarimana government had been compelled to negotiate with the RPF due to successful RPF advances • Progress was being made on a power-sharing agreement • Habyarimana's helicopter was shot out of the sky upon his return from a negotiating session on April 6, 1994 • To this day, unclear who was responsible • However, a well-organized program of genocide broke out almost instantly after the assassination • RTLM began broadcasting a call to "cut down the tall trees" • Roadblocks were thrown up almost instantly • People who were known to be Tutsi, who records showed were Tutsi, or who appeared Tutsi were killed • Also killed were "moderate Hutus" who were known to have opposed anti-Tutsi propaganda (and the regime), Hutus who tried to stop the killing, and even Hutus who tried to avoid taking part in the killing • Who took part in the killings? Rwandan Genocide • Not just the militia: many hundreds of thousands of people, ranging from ordinary citizens to mayors, members of the clergy... • (From the textbook): The main agents of genocide were the ordinary peasants themselves....Even in the cases where people did not move spontaneously but were forced to take part in the killings, they were helped along into violence by the mental and emotional lubricant of ideology. We can see it for example in the testimony of the 74 year-old "killer" captured by the RPF: "I regret what I did...I am ashamed, but what would you have done if you had been in my place? Either you took part in the massacre or else you were massacred yourself. So I took my weapons and I defended the members of my tribe against the Tutsi." • The rallying cry to the killers during the genocide was: "Do your work." • Hundreds of thousands of Hutus worked as killers in regular shifts over a period of weeks. • In the massacre at Nyarubuye Church, Tutsis asked the mayor how they might be spared. He suggested they sanctuary at the church. They did, and a few days later, the mayor came at the head of a pack of policemen and villagers. All were killed, often purposely slowly. Rwandan Genocide: Conclusion • About 75% of the Tutsis in Rwanda were killed within a month; killing continued for three months. • The genocide ended partly because there were so few Tutsis left; partly because the RPF took the country in July. • The RPF leader Paul Kagame is president today. • With the return of Tutsi refugees from Uganda, and some Hutus remaining in exile in eastern Congo, the Hutu/Tutsi mix in the current population is ironically close to what it was pre-genocide • It is now a serious crime in Rwanda ("divisionism") to draw any ethnic distinctions whatsoever in speech Some analysts claim that Rwanda was especially fertile ground for genocide because of a "culture of obedience."

Portrayals of race: candidate skin tone

• During 2008 Democratic primary, Hillary Clinton campaign ran an ad in which Obama appeared unusually dark-skinned (some accused Clinton campaign of doing this intentionally, Clinton campaign emphatically said that this was not the case) Based on what we have seen, what effects might darkening an opponent's skin tone have in a political advertisement? Based on what we have learned, would we expect all individuals to perceive a candidate's skin tone in the same way? Or might different people perceive skin tone differently?

Old Fashion Symbolic Racism

• Endorsement of statements that are blatantly racist (blacks are biologically inferior to whites institutionalized segregation is necessary) • Not related to white Americans partisan preferences in post-civil rights era OFR evenly distributed between two parties • Why did these types of attitudes subside over the last 50 years (laws changed, survey answers shifted)?

The Ultimatum Game

• Experimental subjects are randomly paired • In each pair, one subject is assigned the role of "proposer"; the other is assigned the role of "responder" In the ultimatum game: • The "proposer" makes a proposal as to how to divide a fixed sum of money (say, $10) o For example, the proposer might propose to keep $6 for herself, giving $4 to the responder • The "responder" decides whether to "accept" or "reject" the offer o If the responder "accepts", then each person gets the amount specified in the proposal o If the responder "rejects", then both the proposer and responder get $0 • We can observe the importance of fairness considerations for behavior in the ultimatum game • By varying the context in which the ultimatum game is carried out we can learn more about the determinants of fairness judgments • As an example: o Suppose that subjects are randomly paired... o ...And that both subjects in a pair take a trivia quiz... o ...And that whoever gets the higher score on the quiz becomes the proposer (the loser instead becoming the responder) • Answer: o On average prospers offer less than the original ultimatum game o On average responders are willing to accept lower offers than in the original ultimatum game

Implicit Association Test for Racial Attitudes

• Expose subjects to two different kinds of "stimuli": photographs and words • * Photographs will be images of a white face or a black face • * Words will be either "good" (joy, happy, etc.) or "bad" (hurt, agony, sad, etc.) • Subjects will see a stream of stimuli, one at a time, with photographs and words mixed together (e.g., a black face, the word "happy", the word "agony", a white face, a black face, the word "sad", etc.) • The task varies across two different treatments: • Treatment 1: * press Button 1 if there is a photo of a black face or a "good" word * press Button 2 if there is a photo of a white face or a "bad" word • Treatment 2: * press Button 1 if there is a photo of a white face or a "good" word * press Button 2 if there is a photo of a black face or a "bad" word • Each subject participates in both of these treatments • Treatment 1: * press Button 1 if there is a photo of a black face or a "good" word * press Button 2 if there is a photo of a white face or a "bad" word • Treatment 2: * press Button 1 if there is a photo of a white face or a "good" word * press Button 2 if there is a photo of a black face or a "bad" word Measure subjects' reaction time in classifying stimuli. • Suppose a subject has an implicit association that white faces are "good" and black faces are "bad" - a clear kind of racial "bias" * Such a subject might have fast reaction times in Treatment 2, because the categories white+good/black+bad match predisposition determined by implicit attitudes * Such a subject might have slow reaction times in Treatment 1, because the categories white+bad/black+good do not match predisposition determined by implicit attitudes The Implicit Association Test measures the difference in reaction times between Treatment 2 and Treatment 1 for a given subject as a measure of that subject's implicit racial attitudes • Typical studies on white American subjects show that On average, the reaction time (white+good/black+bad) is faster than the (white+bad/black+good) reaction time • Suggests an implicit association of unfamiliar white and black faces with "good" and "bad", respectively • However, there is considerable variation across white subjects. For some, reaction times differ considerably, while for others, there is no difference in reaction times. One of the strongest predictors of white subjects' IAT "scores" is the extent of contact white subjects have had with black Americans "Contact measures": • Fraction of subjects' friends that are black rather than white Racial diversity of neighborhood in which subjects grew up Whether subject has had a black significant other • In general, the higher the score on "contact measures," the less the difference in reaction times on the IAT. • -> Contact measures are also often used in studying racial attitudes

Reducing intergroup prejudice & conflict using the media: A field experiment in Rwanda (Paluck 2008)

• For obvious reasons, Rwandans face a monumental crisis of trust in their communities, as survivors, returned refugees, and accused killers all live side-by-side • Radio is the most important form of mass media in Rwanda • The Paluck experiment measured the effect of radio programs on Rwandan citizens personal beliefs and social behaviors • Can well-designed radio programs lessen intergroup tensions and aid in reconstructing society? • The experiment attempts to address this question • Musekeweya (moo-say-kay-way-ah), or New Dawn, is an entertainment- education soap opera designed to address the mistrust, lack of communication and interaction, and trauma left by the genocide • Fictional story of two communities (proxies for Hutu and Tutsi; not referred to as ethnic groups because of divisionism laws) • Tensions arise from a land shortage, unfair treatment by the government • Woven into the story are messages about the root causes of vilence • Demonstrates importance of critical thinking, open dissent (as opposed to repressing feelings or blindly following leaders), active bystanders (as opposed to bystander effects ), and intergroup communications • Also includes (through story) advice for dealing with trauma • A sample of communities were randomly assigned to one of two treatments: • Exposure to the New Dawn soap opera over the course of about a year • Exposure to a control soap opera aiming to change beliefs, norms, and behaviors about reproductive health and AIDS • Exposure to soap operas was through Rwandan research assistants who visited each community once a month to play four 20-minute episodes over a portable stereo • People in communities listened to the programs in groups, as is typical in Rwanda; research assistants could therefore be sure that subjects had actually listened to the programs (usually a big problem in real-world media studies) • He experiment compared community members individual interview responses and focus group behaviors across treatment groups • No difference between New Dawn group and control group in terms of personal beliefs about • The origins of mass violence • Bystanders responsibilities to intervene when others are promoting violence or intergroup conflict • Whether people who suffer from trauma are mad • However, people in the New Dawn group were • More likely to reject norms that people must marry only in- group • More likely to deny that it is naïve to trust people • More likely to disagree with If I disagree with something that someone is doing or saying, I should keep quiet • More likely to agree that people should talk about traumatic experiences • More likely to express empathy for people in different roles (prisoners, survivors, poor people) in individual interviews • In addition, the experimenter cleverly observed the dynamics of how the group deliberated when faced with a controversy: how to manage a stereo and cassettes given to the community • Groups in the control communities tended to propose putting the village authority in charge; such proposals were accepted without discussion • Groups in the New Dawn communities tended to have debates about what to do, with multiple people making suggestions: elect a caretaker for the stereo, leave it under communal control • Higher likelihood of expressing dissent • Less willingness to defer unthinkingly to authorities

Zimbardo Prison Experiment (1971) How it Unfolded

• Guards carried out regular "counts" where prisoners were lined up & counted, sometimes awakening prisoners with a whistle at night • At first, prisoners did not take this too seriously and guards were feeling out their new roles • Guards chose such techniques as forcing prisoners to do push-ups.... eventually stepping on prisoners' backs while doing this or forcing other prisoners to do so Day One wasn't too bad. Day Two... Prisoners chose to rebel, ripping off prisoner numbers, barricading themselves in their cells, taunting and cursing the guards Guards were very much angered and frustrated Morning shift of guards became convinced the previous night shift had been too lenient to allow such behavior Called in "reinforcements", started spraying prisoners with fire extinguishers, broke into each cell, stripped prisoners, removed beds, put "ringleaders" in solitary confinement Guards devised "psychological tactics" as a force multiplier: one of the three cells was deemed a "privilege cell," where the three prisoners deemed least rebellious were placed and given privileges (beds, clothes, allowed to eat while food was withheld from others) After half a day, guards moved some of "good" prisoners to "bad" cells and some of "bad" prisoners to "privilege cell" Prisoners became distrustful of each other; assumed that "promoted" prisoners must be informers or collaborators Guards used right to go to the bathroom as a "carrot"; sometimes forced prisoners to use a bucket that was not removed from the cell Late in Day 2, one prisoner began suffering from acute emotional disturbance, ranging to screaming, cursing, and sobbing. Asked to leave but was (initially) refused Prisoners' parents came for a "visiting hour" - prisoners were cleaned up somewhat but still looked awful - parents protested but quickly fell into line Rumor of a "mass escape plot" among the prisoners, which threw the guards into a frenzy, but never materialized Guards then cracked down even harder, making prisoners engage in repetitive, degrading, pointless tasks (cleaning out toilet bowl with bare hands, etc.) Additional prisoners broke down, began sobbing uncontrollably, etc. One broken prisoner was taunted by the other prisoners because he'd made a mess in his cell - experimenters offered to let him go, but he said no, he wanted to go back and prove to the others that he wasn't a "bad prisoner" Prisoners could have simply asked to leave at any time but almost none did so Three "types" of guards emerged: • "Tough but fair" • "Good guys" who did little favors and avoided punishing • Hostile, arbitrary, and cruelly creative However, the "good guards" acted as though they felt helpless to intervene and did not attempt to stop the sadistic guards Study was terminated on Day 6 (less than halfway through): • Experimenters learned that even more degrading abuse was taking place late at night when the cameras were off • A visitor to the experiment very strongly objected to what was going on - the only one of about 50 visitors to question its morality Debriefing: prisoners felt they had lost their identity, began to identify as e.g. "Prisoner #416" Most of the guards were upset the study was terminated early (not the prisoners!)

psychoanalytic theories

• Highlight the role of the unconscious in human behavior • Personality as an "energy system" motivating people to satisfy basic drives (the • Behavior is a product of these drives and individuals' unconscious efforts to suppress and/or channel basic drives • Three elements of personality • Id - instincts and responses to bodily functions; follows pleasure principle • Ego - moderates between the id and the realities of the social world; follows "reality principle" • Superego - conscience or moral arm • When the ego is threatened, people feel anxiety • People use defense mechanisms to defend the ego • Unconscious techniques used to distort reality and avoid anxiety: • Repression (e.g., eliminating an unpleasant memory) • Projection (attributing one's own objectionable impulses to others) • Rationalization (reinterpret own objectionable behavior in a more favorable way) • Denial (of reality, of an impulse) • Approaches to the Study of Personality

White Identity

• Historically, scholars have focused on understanding racial attitudes among whites towards outgroups • And this is still the case • But increasingly we are becoming aware that among the dominant/majority/historically privileged group there is a strong sense of identity, largely centered around resentment/feelings of marginalization • Break off into two groups • One group discusses the Tesler & Sides Monkey Cage • The other group discusses the Jardina Monkey Cage - What is the main take away from the post?

Framing or the Problem Representations in the security Context

• How policymakers frame or represent a given policy problem • How they perceive it to see it as similar or dissimilar to previous events • Can be critically important in determining how they will behave

Extremism & Social Identities

• In Social Identity Theory, there is importance to belonging to groups & seeing those groups positively in comparison to others • One theory about much extremist violence is that when this is not possible, people look for some out-group to blame • Intergroup conflict over resources is always a fact of life, but under conditions of severe socioeconomic/political depression, the environment is often conducive to the identification of one group as a scapegoat that is blamed for all of society's ills • Negative stereotypes of the scapegoat are propagated, and the poor treatment of the scapegoat group undergoes social justification (is rationalized as proper) • This process may proceed all the way to dehumanization of the scapegoat, wherein members of that group are described as less- than-human • Under certain circumstances, social identity pressures can lead "ordinary" people towards "extremist" behavior • Individuals have social identity needs that can be served by scapegoating/dehumanizing out-group members • Group membership typically involves conformity pressures that can help intensify and consolidate negative feelings about out-group members • As individuals form more extreme attitudes or participate in extreme behaviors, "escalation of commitment" problems make it harder to withdraw from group membership • For example, committing acts of violence can intensify one's commitment to a group, because it would be impossible to justify those acts of violence outside the context of the group's ideology

The Dictator Game

• In the dictator game: • The "proposer" makes a proposal as to how to divide a fixed sum of money (say, $10) as before • However, the "responder" has no ability to "accept" or "reject" the offer • Each person simply gets the amount specified in the proposal • If proposers' offers are about the same as they were in the ultimatum game, suggests ultimatum game offers were due to "altruism" or a desire to be nice to the responder • If proposers' offers are now 0, suggests ultimatum game offers were purely due to fear of being rejected by the responder Know what the average outcome is

Why do Experiments

• Interested in casual impact • Not able to isolate impact using other methods o Unobserved confounders • Own data collection needed/feasible Different Types • Field • Lab • Survey • Naturally occurring Quasi-Experiment

Why are Extremists Extremists?

• It there an extremist personality? o Basically not really o Studies of torturers, bombers, terrorists, and other extremist suggests three is no clear personality profile for extremism • Most scholars: extremism is not some kind of mental illness o Case studies indicate that individuals committing "extremist" acts are generally not "insane" • Of course there are some features typical in extremists o Typically lacking in empathy for others and tend to dehumanize their victims o Tend to have more of an "external locus of control" (believe the external environment determines what happens to them) than an "internal locus of control" (believe they have considerable control over their own fate • Recall the Milgram experiments: most subjects were willing to defer to authority by turning the dial all the way up • Milgram argues: these are not sadistic individuals; what drives their behavior is a "person-situation interaction effect" • This relates to the finding that extremists' acts of violence are "nearly always fostered by groups, as opposed to individuals. When someone kills for the sake of promoting a higher good, he may find support and encouragement if he is acting as part of a group of people who share that belief

Women Don't Run? (Kris Kanthak and Jon Woon 2015)

• Lab experiment (here at Pitt!) • 350 subjects (173 men and 177 women) • Each session lasted an hour, interaction anonymous via computer interface • - Mitigates women's perception that voters might be biased against them • Randomly Assigned to groups of 5 so don't know the gender composition of their group • Procedures provided into 5 parts, with demographic questionnaire at the end • - Part 1: Addition task, incentivized performance (to learn their ability in absolute but not relative terms—given their own score but not scored of others) • - Part 2 (V1): Group representation--subjects decide whether they are willing to be selected as group representative (then a rep is randomly selected). Subjects repeat addition task, and paid for own performance plus performance of representative. • Everyone maximizes their payoffs if highest performer of the group is selected • So willingness to volunteer should be based on beliefs about relative abilities • Part 2 (V2): Group Representation- In addition to the 25 cents for own correct, and 50 extra for rep correct, subjects receive bonus $2 for being selected as representative, and pay a $1 cost for volunteering. • - Part 3 Election: Same as part 2, except now instead of random selection, representatives are elected. Addition task, payments like in part 2 (depending on whether in V1 or V2 round). • • If 2 or more candidates, subjects engage in one of two types of campaigns • - Chat: text messages to others ("cheap talk") - Truth: actual scores from part 1 revealed • Part 4 Estimation: subjects incentivized to give beliefs about other group members' performance (scores in part 1) and entry decisions (whether they volunteered or not) • This helps determine whether gender diffs are due to other heterogeneity in relative confidence between men and women • Can use a subject's actual score and her elicited beliefs to assess relative confidence • Part 5 Risk Assessment: measured risk preferences (with an incentivized lottery task) Results: • Men and women equally likely to volunteer when rep is chosen randomly • Women less likely to volunteer when rep is chosen through election • Controlling for abilities, risk aversion, beliefs about abilities • This effect persists except in the condition where elections are both truthful (truth campaign) and costless (no $1 fee to volunteer)

Legitimacy

• Legitimacy is a psychological property of an authority, institution, or social arrangement that leads those connected to it to believe that it is appropriate, proper, and just. • Because of legitimacy, people feel that they ought to defer to decisions and rules, following them voluntarily out of obligation rather than out of fear of punishment or anticipation of reward. • Being legitimate is important to the success of authorities, institutions, and institutional arrangements since it is difficult to exert influence over others based solely upon the possession and use of power. • When governing power is effective, citizens "relate to the powerful as moral agents as well as self-interested actors; they are cooperative and obedient on grounds of legitimacy as well as reasons of prudence and advantage." • Central to the idea of legitimacy is the belief that some decision made or rule created by these authorities is valid in the sense that it is entitled to be obeyed by virtue of who made the decision or how it was made. • A legitimating ideology is a set of justifications or "legitimizing myths" (Major1994, Sidanius & Pratto 1999) • The social theorist Weber distinguished several distinct sources of legitimacy: • Legitimacy based upon deference to customs and values (traditional authority) • Legitimacy based upon devotion to the actions or character of an authority (charismatic authority) • Legitimacy linked to the process of rule creation and interpretation (rational bureaucratic authority) • Weber's work makes clear that the legitimation of authority and institutions through "the rule of law," while widespread in modern societies, is only one of many ways in which social arrangements might potentially be justified. • The legitimacy of institutions can be immensely valuable for society - think about the difference between a society where election results are accepted without a second thought, versus one where any election result might potentially be contested with violence

The effect of drawing attention to potential bias in media (Brooks and Hayes 2016)

• Media messages that speak to gender bias may have a range of effects • Survey experiment on samples of general public, campaign donors, and young Americans • News coverage portraying women as facing bias boosts female candidates' support • Also boosts willingness of young people to engage in campaign activism on their behalf • Compared to one that describes an equal playing field • Portrayals of bias does not affect fundraising ability • But does reduce young women's confidence in their own ability to run a political campaign

Motive theories

• Motives are those aspects of personality concerned with goals and goal-directed actions • Motives "energize, direct, and select behavior" • The Big Three Motivations o The need for power o Need for affiliation intimacy (concern for close relations with others) o Need for achievement What is personality used for in political psychology? • Study of political leadership o How do leaders' personality traits influence their behavior or effectiveness? • Study of political ideologies/orientations o How are individuals' personality traits related to their ideologies (e.g., liberal vs conservative) or orientations (e.g., social dominance) • Study of political behavior o How do individuals' personality traits affect their predispositions to behave in the political sphere?

Typical studies on black American subjects show that

• Much of the time, there is no difference between the reaction time(white+good/black+bad) and the reaction time(white+bad/black+good) • Sometimes, evidence for the same pattern as in white subjects: reaction time(white+good/black+bad) is faster than the reaction time(white+bad/black+good) • -> Sometimes taken as consistent with partial internalization of negative stereotypes by the stereotyped group • What is the psychological mechanism behind implicit associations of this kind? • Some studies suggest a powerful mediating role of emotions. • Remember, the IAT's we have discussed involve the use of unfamiliar white and black faces. • Brain imaging (functional MRI) studies show that when white subjects are shown a series of unfamiliar white and black faces, on average, there is extra activation in the amygdala upon viewing an unfamiliar black face; the amygdala is typically associated with emotional responses related to fear • Suggests that unfamiliar black faces may provoke a negative emotional response that may in turn mediate the negative association • ...All of this up until now has been dealing with unfamiliar faces

Some Effects of Nationalism

• Nationalists are often deeply concerned with the objective of gathering together communities existing outside the borders of the state whom they regard as a part of their national community • Irridentism= the desire to join together all parts of a national community within a single territorial state • Members of the community who live outside the territory of a nation-state are called the diaspora

Are Voters Biased Against Female Candidates? (Huddy and Terkildsen 1994)

• Origins of voter's expectations of greater female competency on "compassion" issues, and greater male competency on military and defense issues • Gender trait stereotypes vs. gender belief stereotypes • Experiment: • 297 undergraduate participants • Randomly assigned to hear about a male or a female candidate • Either had typically masculine or feminine traits • Measured perceptions of how good the candidate was at a host of issue areas • Results: stronger support for trait approach • Warm and expressive candidates (regardless of gender) seen as better at compassion issues • Instrumental candidates (assertive, coarse, tough, aggressive, stern, masculine, rational, self confident, etc.) were rated as more competent to handle the military and economic issues (regardless of gender) • Masculine instrumental traits increased the candidate's perceived competence on broader range of issues than the feminine traits • Some support for belief approach: o Gender-based expectations about the candidate's political views affected their rated competency on compassion o But not on other types of issues

Identities, Conformity, and Obedience

• People conform to group norms for a variety of reasons • Desire to be a "good group member" for social identity reasons; discomfort in violating behavioral prescriptions • Violating group norms may lead to being disliked by other members of the group • At times, violating group norms can also lead to banishment or to punishment or violence from • People also, as we have seen, often defer to authority figures, even to the point of committing acts they would never ordinarily commit alone • Obedience is enhanced when... • Actions are authorized by authority • Actions are routinized, making it possible to do mechanically and with little thought • Any victims of the actions are dehumanized in advance • Individuals feel compliance pressures from other group members • Sometimes, and especially in periods of trouble, the most fanatical members become group leaders, issuing harsher behavioral prescriptions, and acting strongly to prevent dissension within the group "Various Contexts for Extremism" • Terrorist Organizations • Ideological splinter groups • Race-based splinter groups • Paramilitary organizations • Organizations of state terror • Acts of genocide

Social Identity Theory

• People have basic tendency to engage in social categorization • Once categories are formed, people strive for a positive sense of social identity • This motivation causes perceptual biases and discriminatory patterns of behavior However, this framework does not explain in much detail why prejudices are very strong in some cases but weaker in others, or why some individuals are more prejudiced than others.

Outside threat entrenches views of the status Quo:

• People will defend and justify the social system in response to threat by using stereotypes to differentiate between high- and low-status groups to a greater degree than when there is no threat. • "Rally-Around-The-Flag" Effects: support for political leaders, the political system, and other aspects of the status quo all increase when an external threat emerges (going back to nationalism) • George W. Bush's huge jump in approval rating (to 90%) immediately after the 9/11 attacks

Rationalization of the status quo:

• People will rationalize the anticipated status quo by judging likely events to be more desirable then unlikely events o True even in the absence of personal responsibility o True whether those events are initially defined as attractive or unattractive o True especially when things are out of ones control • Evidence: • Immediately before the 2000 US presidential election, both democrats and republicans judged potential bush and gore presidencies to be more desirable as their perceived likelihood increased and less desirable as their perceived likelihood decreased • Democrats, republicans, and independents all showed substantial increases in support for the iraq war immediately after president George W Bush announcement of war plans and the commencement of military action • Obama approval rating jumped 70% immediately after the election

Modern Racism

• Prejudice revealed in subtle, indirect ways • CRM made these old-fashioned beliefs largely socially unacceptable Modern Racism Scale: - "It's really a matter of some people not trying hard enough; if Blacks would only try harder, the could be just as well of as Whites." - But some say this just captures variation in individuals' sensitivity to giving socially desirable responses (not their racial attitudes) - Still, the very fact that norms changed and this effect is detected says something about the evolution of racist attitudes in US • Modern racists have tended to vote Republican

four theories explaining prejudice

• Social Identity Theory • Realistic Conflict Theory • Social Learning Theory • Social Dominance Theory

How do we rationalize status quo?

• Stereotypes as rationalization of the status quo: o People use stereotypes to rationalize social and economic status differences between groups so that the same target group will be stereotyped differently depending on whether it is perceived to be high or low in status. • Evidence: Using experiments manipulations.... • The opposite when the in-group was believed to be higher in status

Subliminal exposure to national flags (Hassin et al 2007)

• Subject pool: Israeli citizens • Subjects in a treatment group were exposed to subliminal images of an Israeli flag before answering a questionnaire • Subjects in a control group answered the same questionnaire but were not exposed to subliminal images of an Israeli flag • A measure of all subjects' extent of "Identification With Israeli Nationalism" (IWIN) was obtained before they took part in the experiment • With respect to several different dependent variables, exposure to the flag reduced polarization among subjects: Voting Intentions. • In the control group, subjects with a high level of IWIN on average expressed preference for right-wing parties; subjects with a low level of IWIN on average expressed preference for left-wing parties. • In the treatment group exposed to the Israeli flag, both subjects with high and low levels of IWIN expressed more moderate preferences (for more centrist parties) compared to the control group. Issue positions. • Similar moderating effects were observed for attitudes regarding the Israeli pull-out from the Gaza strip

Bystander Effect (Darley and Latane 1968)

• Subjects were invited to a lab under the pretext of taking part in a discussion of "personal problems" • Subjects were strangers to one another; either 2, 3, 4, or 5 subjects took part in any given session • Communication took place over an intercom, allegedly to ensure privacy, and subjects couldn't physically see the others they were talking to • At some point, a confederate subject started faking an epileptic seizure: • "I-er-um-I think I-I need-er-if-if could-er-er-somebody er-er-er-er-er-er-er give me a little-er-give me a little help here because-er-I-er-I'm-er-erh-h-having a-a-a real problem-er-right now and I-er-if somebody could help me out it would-it would- er-er s-s-sure be-sure be good . . . because-there-er-er-a cause I-er-I-uh-I've got a-a one of the-er-sei er-er-things coming on and-and-and I could really-er-use some help so if somebody would-er-give me a little h-help-uh-er-er-er-er-er c- could somebody-er-er-help-er-uh-uh-uh (choking sounds). . . . I'm gonna die-er- er-I'm . . . gonna die-er-help-er-er-seizure-er-[chokes, then quiet]." Result • Experimenters measured the time it took for somebody to come to the aid of the seizure victim • The more people that were involved in the group, the longer it took for somebody to come to the victim's aid Results • Similar bystander effects have been found in a wide variety of different settings • Other studies of diffusion of responsibility show that, in many settings, individual people put less effort into a common task when there are more people carrying out that task (e.g., how hard each person pulls on a rope in a simulated tug-of-war)

Zimbardo Prison Experiment (1971) Setup

• Subjects: College students who were carefully screened for psychological problems or "weaknesses" • Timeframe: subjects signed up to be immersed in the experiment for a two-week period • Roles: Students were randomly assigned to be either "prisoners" or "guards." • The prisoners were "arrested" in a realistic scenario (involving actual police, actual police cars) and taken to a mock prison (basement of the psychology department). Prisoners were not expecting the "arrest." • Prisoners were stripped, "deloused," given shapeless sack-like uniforms, and referred to using "prisoner numbers"; guards wore realistic police-like uniforms. • Task: Guards were not given specific instructions, beyond being told they should do whatever was necessary to maintain law and order and command the respect of the prisoners without physically harming them.

The Security Dilemma

• Suppose that national leaders perceive (correctly or incorrectly) a threatening security environment • A natural response is to take defensive actions (arms buildups, increased defense spending, etc.) • A given leader may know that her own motivations are peaceful, and tends to assume that her peaceful intentions are transparent to their neighbors • The kinds of defensive actions involved tend to be similar to the kinds of actions that would be taken by those preparing for aggression • One's neighbors may in fact be uncertain about one's own intentions.... • .... And, in forming judgments, may rely on visible indicators of behavior.... • .... So may interpret one's defensive actions as potentially hostile in nature • Positive feedback loop may lead to arms race or even to war • Think about the Security Dilemma in terms of the dispositional vs. situational attributions and the fundamental attribution error. • Policymakers often fail to understand how their actions are likely to be perceived (or misperceived) by neighboring states • The Security Dilemma dynamic can help entrench "the enemy image" or other negative stereotypes • Easily leads to an "inherent bad-faith" perspective on perceived adversaries, through which • "Bad behavior" by the counterparty is seen as evidence that she is of bad faith • "Good behavior" by the counterparty is seen as having been coerced; serves as "evidence" supporting the wisdom of a "hard-line" policy • "Cognitive rigidity" = when an actor becomes unwilling/unable to update their beliefs about a counterparty, regardless of the events that take place • "Belief perseverance" • Cognitive rigidity/belief perseverance can exacerbate tensions between states

Are Voters Biased Against Female Candidates? (Mo 2014)

• Survey with a voting experiment where more qualified candidate sex is randomized • New gender and leadership IAT measure • Results: o Propensity to pick female candidate increases as explicit and implicit attitudes against female leadership decrease o Sig: Gender attitudes in elections remain consequential, but have grown subtler, which is missed when only assessing self-reports (explicit) o Qualification scan mitigate effects, but not completely • Explicit statement of male pref do not respond to individuating information (even if female can clearly more qualified) • Implicit pref tend to select the more qualified candidate regardless of candidate sex

System Justification Theory

• System justification theory describes the process by which existing social arrangements are legitimized, even at the expense of personal and group interest. • Basic assumption of system justification: o There is a general ideological motive to justify the existing social order o This motive is at least partially responsible for the internalization of inferiority among members of disadvantaged groups o It is observed most readily at an implicit, unconscious level of awareness o Paradoxically, it is sometimes strongest among those who are harmed by the status quo • Big picture argument o Ego o Group o System • Each of these has the potential to be in conflict or contradiction with one another for members of disadvantaged groups • Members of disadvantage groups are likely to engage in school change only when ego justification and or group jurisdiction motives overcome the strength of system justification needs a tendencies.

Variations of this study were carried out in a variety of different contexts

• The obedience rate does appear to vary a bit with features of the setting (e.g., university office vs. a sketchy backstreet office, etc.)... • ...but it doesn't vary that much. A substantial fraction of subjects obeys until the end across the different settings that have been explored

What makes a given authority legitimate?

• This finding is related in some sense to conceptions of legitimacy • Authorities and institutions are views as more legitimate when they exercise their authority through procedures that people experience as being fair • In this specific instance the power of the proposer was seen as more legitimate when the proposer had her position by virtue of a trivial achievement rather than though random assignment • This can be seen as related to ideas of procedural fairness o Responders react differently to the same offer depending on the procedures which led to the generation of that offer o Here is it the proposer herself who is in a sense seen as more legitimate but this same idea can apply to rules, lawmaking bodies, and other kinds of institutions as well • The literature on legitimacy stresses the importance of ideas of procedural fairness in affecting whether citizens view particular institutions as legitimate o Outcome fairness is not irrelevant, but procedural fairness, and being treated with dignity and respect, are often seen as important o It is thought that social identities also play a role in legitimizing process. • Summary: a key aspect of legitimacy comes from procedural fairness o An institution exhibits procedural fairness when everyone is treated by the institution with respect and in the same way o This is distinct from the idea of outcome fairness o A system in which special favors are endemic tends to lose legitimacy in this sense

Trait theories

• Traits are personality characteristics that are stable over time and across situations • Traits produce predispositions to think, feel, or act in particular patterns toward people, events, and situations • Psychologists have sought to develop a taxonomy of traits. Most famous is the "Big Five" The "Big Five" Personality Dimensions Neuroticism • High: people who worry and are nervous and insecure • Low: people who are calm, secure, and unemotional Extraversion • High: people who are sociable, optimistic, fun loving, and affectionate • Low: people who are quiet, reserved, and aloof Agreeableness • High: people who are trusting, good natured, helpful, and soft-hearted • Low: people who are cynical, rude, irritable, and uncooperative Openness to Experience • High: people who are curious, creative, and have many interests • Low: people who are conventional and have narrow interests Conscientiousness • High: people who are organized, hardworking, and reliable • Low: people who are aimless, unreliable, negligent, and hedonistic Big five and other personality studies are conducted using questionnaires tapping into how high or low a person is in a particular trait • Scales like we saw earlier in class • Which personality trait did we discuss before break? Other personality typologies • MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) • Introversion vs. Extroversion • Sensing vs. Intuition • (literal, empirical perception vs abstract, figurative perception) • Thinking vs. Feeling • (objective, detached, logical decision making vs subjective, value- or emotion-based decision making) • Judging vs. Perceiving • (seeking resolution and order vs. curious, spontaneous, tolerant of disorder) • Approaches to the Study of Personality

Other Studies on Exposure to Flags

• Use varying methodologies • Subliminal exposure to flags (or not); Filling out a survey in a room with a huge flag (or not) • Surveys to measure attitudes; "Lexical Tasks" designed to test the accessibility of different ideas • Some summary findings on US flag experiments • Exposure to the US flag makes accessible norms of egalitarianism • Subjects who are high in "nationalism" report less hostility towards Arabs and Muslims when primed with flags before answering a survey; for subjects who are low in "nationalism", the flag makes no difference (hostility towards Arabs and Muslims was already low) • The second finding is mediated by a pathway defined by the first • Exposure to the US flag has relatively little effect on "patriotism" (defined as "love and concern for one's country and major symbols) but a significant positive effect on "nationalism" (defined as a belief that Americans are superior to others) • These studies suggest that exposure to flags evoke in-group social norms as well as emphasizing in-group versus out-group identities

Are Voters Biased Against Female Candidates? (Lawless and Hayes 2016)

• Using the CCES to survey 3,000 citizens, asked what came to mind when thinking about the Democratic and Republican House candidates in their districts • Most respondents failed to mention sex • Candidate sex had no effect on whether a representative was considered • Empathetic • Competent • Strong leader • Able to handle certain issues (health care, the economy) • Or who the person voted for (man or woman candidate if running) • Sharing partisan labels did lead to significantly more favorable evaluations of a candidate • 400,000+ campaign ads; 50,000+ tweets; 10,000 local newspaper articles • Find that: • Male and female candidates talk about the same issues • Receive comparable coverage in local news media • Argue that the declining novelty of women in politics and increased party polarization have eliminated systematic gender bias in political campaigns • Analysis of ads for 2010 House revealed that male and female candidates campaigned on the same issues • Analysis of Twitter feeds of US House candidates in 2014 finds similar results • Local newspapers no more likely to comments on a woman candidate's appearance, family roles, or traits than they are to comment on a man's gendered attributes • Cautions against drawing generalizable conclusions from national political contests • But still, blue pantsuit, "condescending" smile, shrill?

Group Justification Theories

• We have seen a variety of ideas related to social identities and group-based behavior o Similar outcomes are preferred to dissimilar others o Prejudice is a form of hostility directed at out-group members o Intergroup relations in society are inherently competitive and conflict ridden o Intergroup behavior is driven primarily be ethnocentrism and in group favoritism o Prejudice, discrimination, and institutionalized oppression are inevitable outcomes of intergroup relations o Members of dominate groups strive to impose their hegemonic will on members of subordinate groups

Implicit Association Tests

• When familiar faces (both white and black) are used instead, there is typically no or minimal difference in reaction times in most subjects • This is true when the faces of famous individuals are used • Also appears that repeated exposure to the same initially unfamiliar face leads to decreasing fear responses as exposure increases • Suggests, among other things, that how race matters can change over the course of a long political campaign

What are the potential sources of bias?

• Women and men are implicitly biased against female candidates (why and in what ways) • Men are implicitly biased against female candidates but women don't compensate for this by voting more for women • Campaigns treat female candidates differently, which then affects voters (how in what ways)

Are Voters Biased Against Female Candidates? (West 2018) 2nd case

• Your answer to a bunch of questions about how important it is that you are the gender that you are • How much do you internalize your gender identity • Republican men have much higher attachment to their identify then democratic men • Democratic men don't ever think about being a man when they think about who they are • Republican men can reduce that attachment really easily • Completely different among women • Republican men are more attached to their group identity but this identity can be played with • For some people their gender identify is important just because of their gender