Prejudice Review. Ch 10

Linguistic Bias

subtle prejudice can leak through our use of certain phrases, tones, etc. patronizing speech, abnormalization, and vanishing.

covert

hidden, intentional, and malicious (e.g., tokenism, sabotage). Person hides it and they know it. This one is clearly malintentioned.

sabotage

You have 2 employees. 1 is Arab. This employee is given either less desirable work or too much to do and you purposely know this. You are making it hard for them to do their job. Making them become a bad employee.

abnormalization

emphasize differences between out-group and social norms. Instead of focusing on commonalities they will add extra details in that, to remind the person they are from a group that does not agree with the normal customs

patronizing speech

interruptions, giving commands, baby talk

subtle

less obvious, hard to document. Most innocuous. People might commit subtle discrimination without realizing it. Can be attributed to ambiguous situations/factors.

Tokenism

only hire 1 or 2 members of a group to put false front that you are not discriminatory but you are only hiring this limited number.

responses of discriminator

• After someone commits a discriminatory act, that person typically feels bad. • Those low in prejudice experience guilt • Those high in prejudice experience anger and irritation toward others • When another person points out the discriminatory behavior, the actor feels more guilt if 1) it is a highly proscribed (not permitted form) prejudice and 2) if the whistleblower is not a member of the target out-group

stereo fit hypothesis

• Masculine traits (e.g., assertive, dominant) are believed to make a person a better fit for a managerial job • People may even bend their views of which traits are more desirable in a job candidate depending on whether the candidate is male or female. For example, one study showed that when reading a description about a male or female applicant (for position of Police Chief), participants rated the traits describing the male applicant as more important for the job. So, when the male was described as highly educated, then that trait was ranked highly. However, when the male was described as streetwise (but not highly educated), then streetwise was ranked more highly. • Jackson, Esses, & Burris (2001) offer a different explanation‐ differences in respect for the two genders, not stereotypes, leads to biases in workplace hiring and performance evaluations

organizational discrimination

• Occurs when policies, rules, and practices of formal organizations results in unequal outcomes for members of different groups • "Employment audit": research strategy in which two similar applications are sent; differ only in terms of race or sex of applicant • Black applicants are less likely to be offered interviews and, when interviewed, are treated more coldly; also, they have lower starting salaries and are offered lower‐level jobs; chances do not depend on application strength. • Also, pregnant women are less likely to be hired. • Once hired, there are also differences in performance evaluations; better ratings for those who work sex‐typed jobs; differences in both perceived and objective performance for Black employees‐ the latter may be due to "lost opportunities effect" (more negative job experiences causes decreases in performance) • Promotions are also biased, even when performance ratings are equal

prejudice and discrimination

• Only modest correlations; stronger when measuring intentions to discriminate. It is harder to measure behavior correctly. Intentions to act is where you see the strong correlation. • Greater tendency to discriminate against stereotypical out-group members • Stronger correlations when examining correlation between controllable attitudes and controllable behavior (e.g., friendliness of conversation) as well as implicit attitudes and automatic behaviors (e.g., friendliness of nonverbal). The type of attitude you measure needs to match the types of behavior. It is a matching game. This will better and more accurately predict. • Stronger correlations when prejudice is perceived as socially supported. We often look to others to determine how we ourselves should act. • Sometimes prejudice is going to lead to discrimination sometimes it is not. It depends on the key factors listed in this slide.

Forms of Discrimination

• Prejudice only has modest correlation with discrimination; this is typical of most attitude‐behavior relationships • Permitted vs. proscribed prejudices: some forms of prejudice are allowed or justified while others are not • Three main classifications: blatant, subtle, covert

Study

• Sent over 1,000 emails to landlords who advertised apartment vacancies in Los Angeles • Used one of three names: Patrick McDougall, Tyrell Jackson, Said Al‐ Rahman • Responses were coded as positive (if email mentioned it was still available) or negative (not available, no response) • Responses also listed in graph on PP. Aa price goes up. Discrimination to black increases. Arab not as much. • We consider this study covert discrimination

interpersonal discriminatory behavior

• Suppression of discriminatory behavior is a function of perceived rewards & punishments. You have to look at these factors to see if prejudice will translate into discrimination. If you expect you will be rewarded then you will pursue. • Anonymity leads to increased overt discrimination • Greater discrimination, in the form of less helping behavior, when other factors (i.e., costs) can be blamed • Establishing moral credentials (i.e., leading others to believe one is not prejudiced) can lead to more prejudice in the future Ex: I have a black friend. They will feel they have room to be discriminatory because they are already being moral in this relationship so they don't need to be in others.

vanishing

• out-groups are removed from sentence by manipulating sentence structure (e.g., Tyrell hit the ball vs. The ball was hit.)

discrimination stronger when

• outgroup member(s) is stereotypical. • examining correlation between controllable attitudes and controllable behavior (e.g., friendliness of conversation) as well as implicit attitudes and automatic behaviors (e.g., friendliness of nonverbal) • prejudice is permitted (i.e. perceived as socially supported)

Permitted

• the social norm actually says that you can discriminate against this group without really any backlash. Yes it is permitted but when used inappropriately this can change. It is the way people apply these things. Terrorism vs Muslims. - Examples: rapists, terrorists, cheaters vs. AIDS patients, ugly people, Jews, the disabled

Blatant

• unequal, harmful treatment that is intentional, visible, and easily documented. This is the global classification. Explicit unequal treatment. Hate crimes.