The upshot here? All you need is a little compassion and flexibility of thought. The boys were grouped into the Scouts and the Eagles, and from the previous item on this list, you can guess what this categorization did for intergroup relations. When Sharif put the boys in direct competition with one another e.
Ah, boys. Of course. Here is a bit of extra motivation: While you may adopt such a resolution to increase your own well-being, chances are that outgroup members may indirectly benefit from your regimen as well. This is nice, except that one unintended consequence is that those who do not share these particular values are more likely to be the targets of our prejudice.
In other words, those who challenge our cultural worldview become a threat to our continued immortality, and we grow intolerant of them. Many things can remind us of our own mortality, and many of them are outside of our control.
But we do have control over our health to an extent, of course. A great, catchy song with its heart in the right place, for sure—but its recipe for tolerance is wrong. An example illustrates why. And as strategy 7 reminds us, you can spend so much energy worrying about not noticing race that you do worse in your social interactions as a result.
Further, research has shown that colorblindness can actually increase prejudice, precisely because the salience of race makes it more likely to be used unconsciously. The solution? Acknowledge differences, rather than try to fight an uphill battle to ignore them.
This strategy is known as multiculturalism, and differs from colorblindness in that it embraces diversity and difference. Research by Jacquie Vorauer has shown that when people experience anxiety during intergroup interactions, they also expect their cross-race partners to know how they feel—to know why they are acting awkwardly—and to overestimate the amount of positivity they are conveying during interracial interactions.
This can easily turn into a vicious cycle, because we then feel further rejected and nervous when our partner does not reciprocate the positivity we think we are showing. In related research, Nicole Shelton and Jennifer Richeson have shown that while both Whites and Blacks are actually interested in interracial interactions, both groups believe that the other group is not interested in interracial interaction—and neither initiates interaction based on this false belief.
Even better: Work on that anxiety and nervousness through strategy 1! You can read more about this strategy here. He is a former director of the Greater Good Science Center. But I do notice myself thinking in divisive terms sometimes, even when I try not to. So these may be helpful. I would like to have the Top 10 ways to help others become less prejudiced though, because I do know some people who are overtly prejudiced and that is what causes greater division. This might support the argument that acknowledging and discussing historical events would be helpful in terms of breaking down existing barriers and challenging the residual prejudice apparently stemming from historical conflict and poor relations.
Some limitations were noted. Firstly there is a question over long-term impact, which is the case with virtually all studies of this type, even if they show encouraging results. Results from this study also suggested that effects were different when lessons were delivered in single group versus contact settings. This does not suggest that contact in general is not beneficial, however it may be that when confronting history and attempting to challenge prejudices against out-groups, there are advantages of delivering this in single settings.
This question is worthy of future research, and where possible a balance should be sought. Secondly, one concern raised by teachers taking part in the study in Northern Ireland was that by raising sectarianism as an issue, it could in a sense worsen the situation by creating a problem where one does not exist:.
Some of the feedback included use of symbols that children may not understand, for example paramilitary symbols.
Again this is something that has to be carefully considered when designing, implementing, and monitoring prejudice-reduction initiatives based on intergroup theories. It would suggest that regular feedback is sought as part of on-going evaluation of projects, and acted upon when necessary in terms of changing content or delivery style.
Notwithstanding the risks associated with transferring any policy from one jurisdiction to another, some of the principles raised in this intervention might be useful if applied carefully elsewhere. Unsurprisingly, many of the key prejudice-reduction interventions have taken place in areas in which ethnic or other prejudice results in or is exacerbated by overt conflict, or at least has done in recent times. In relation to contexts with less overly problematic intergroup relations, such as Scotland, we of course have to be wary of what conclusions might be drawn from 'what works' in these settings, however there may be useful strategies that could help to influence prejudice-reduction initiatives more broadly.
With findings published in , 'Enabling Adolescents in Culturally Diverse Environments to Peacefully Resolve Ethnic Group Conflicts' was a project based on the idea that change is best delivered through small groups.
The project brought different ethnic groups together at two diverse Midwestern High Schools in the United States [2]. The programme was designed to maximise the benefits and diffuse the potential risks of contact, based on 'intergroup dialogue programmes' combined with 'conflict mediation'.
Over a three-year period and with a total of participants, school students explored dynamics of intergroup relations in their own school and with another school by exploring stereotypes, and examining their attitudes towards others and vice versa. The project evaluation was based on pre and post-test surveys, as well as qualitative interviews.
Among the key findings was a reduction in prejudiced attitudes and stereotypes, reports of new friendships, and more knowledge. The authors note that crucial to the success of the intervention was careful choice of facilitators; involving those who had previously completed the programme to help run it the following year; careful attention to feedback; and the collaboration of researchers, practitioners in this case teachers , and participants in this case students.
In the same volume, Bargal describes the effects of an intervention with Israeli and Arab youth in Israel, which focused on reducing conflict and negative stereotypes between the two groups.
Like the Michigan University project outlined above, the intervention was based on the principles of Lewin's 'reeducation' theory. Youth from both groups were recruited to participate in a three-day conflict management workshop, and participants dealt with issues such as intergroup conflict, stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination.
Central to the intervention was discussion of the complexity of the Arab-Jewish conflict, and the opportunity for both groups to discuss their personal experiences of living with conflict. According to Bargal, group facilitators played a crucial role:. They emphasize the overall need for national group identity and the importance of each group's unique history.
Clearly, provision of accurate information is important, and a setting which facilitates debate and discussion of what might be considered contentious issues increases the potential efficacy of an intervention. Bargal noted that there had to be high levels of motivation to take part, emphasising that people have to want to at least be open to challenging their own biases. Moreover, it was concluded that potential effects in terms of attitude change could have been encumbered by the fact that the intervention was short term.
The final real-life case study is an intervention developed and tested as part of a psycho-educational initiative at various universities across the United States.
Souweidane's 'An Initial Test of an Intervention Designed to Help Youth Question Negative Ethnic Stereotypes' was based on perspective-taking principles and the idea of reducing prejudice by challenging stereotypes. Pre and post-test surveys as well as observations were used to test effectiveness of the intervention. Part of the activities included using media to talk about stereotypes - for example, looking at websites such as 'Facing History and Ourselves' to learn more about the history of anti-Semitism.
The results from the study were encouraging in terms of improving tolerance and positive relations, and improvements in negative stereotypes. The intervention was said to have positive effects on participants' critical thinking which Walsh argued is crucial to reduce prejudice , and this was especially the case for peer educators.
Particularly promising was the effectives of peer-based learning, which is supported by social learning theory and action research. Young people may play an important role in helping their peers confront and address negative ethnic stereotypes.
Involving young people as leaders and educators in interventions targeting young people has numerous merits acknowledged in the literature cf. Stukas et. This theory was supported by the example outlined here:.
Research on this topic may be enhanced by adopting empowerment theory practices in the development of an intervention. The significant improvement among the peer educator group supports this approach.
This study has demonstrated that empowering youth to take on a leadership role, such as a peer educator, positively affects the youth leader. Future research may want to focus on engaging youth in interventions targeting them so that we gain greater understanding of the youth educator role effect and so that improved outcomes may be achieved" Some limitations included that the intervention was limited to four sessions, and the author suggests that more time for example, a semester-long class would be more likely to affect change Although this report focuses on real-life interventions in order to get a sense of what might be most straightforwardly transferred to other contexts, findings from lab-based studies can also be applied carefully elsewhere.
A particularly useful lab-based intervention to include as a case study is Devine et al 'Long-term reduction in implicit race bias: A prejudice habit-breaking intervention'. The three month longitudinal study aimed to determine whether interventions can have long-term effects in terms of reducing implicit biases. The intervention took place in the University of Wisconsin, USA , with 91 non-Black participants, and the authors claim that their study "is the first to our knowledge to produce long-term change in implicit bias using a randomized, controlled design" As discussed in section 3 of this report, the existence of implicit biases mean that even people who are consciously non-prejudiced and consider themselves to be supportive of equality can unintentionally act in prejudiced ways towards others.
As Devine et al comment, "this process leads people to be unwittingly complicit in the perpetuation of discrimination" In this study, the authors seek to build on promising but limited results from what they term 'easy-to implement strategies' such as perspective taking and imagining counter-stereotypic examples.
They note that reductions in prejudice from such short-term interventions are "likely to be highly contextual and short-lived" Participants were therefore engaged in a long-term process, with intentional efforts to overcome biased responses. Being confronted with this evidence was thought to increase awareness of bias, and this awareness was developed through the other aspects of the intervention, such as the training section which provided participants with strategies to overcome these in everyday settings for example through perspective taking and stereotype replacement.
Importantly, the study noted improvement of attitudes over time, perhaps as people became increasingly self-aware and used the strategies taught to overcome instances of prejudice. Of course it is important to note the limitations of the study. Participants were all psychology students, common in lab-based studies but controlled for as best as possible. It is also unclear how easily this type of intervention would be administered in real-life - perhaps in school settings it might be more feasible than other settings.
Another key issue is to think about who the interventions are targeting and who they are likely to be missing. Most people do not consider themselves to be prejudiced so whether they would commit to a goal of 'breaking the prejudice habit' is questionable. However, it may be the case that such strategies are still useful in that they address the problem of people wanting to be tolerant and free of prejudice, but still holding implicit bias.
Given that we have already established the difference between many people's intentions regarding equality and their attitudes to the implementation of measures which aim to actually tackle inequality, it is likely that such interventions would address an important discrepancy. In many ways, the interventions discussed in the previous section could be termed 'diversity training' because the objective is to help people value diversity, as opposed to fearing difference - a key cause of prejudice.
This section, however, looks at more short-term and isolated diversity training programmes, rather than focused and longer term interventions targeted at certain populations. These often take place in corporate workplaces, and with adults as opposed to children and adolescents, though some do focus on younger people. This type of training comes in many forms, with some 'instructional' in nature such as showing movies or delivering lectures, and others encouraging interactive activities such as role plays and discussions.
Diversity training may involve group discussions about 'difference', based on the same values which are at the heart of educational initiatives: overcoming ignorance; expressing hidden assumptions; and feeling empathy for other groups or individuals Paluck Diversity training is an industry with huge levels of investment, yet as Abrams comments, there is "almost no adequate evaluative research" Following a discussion of the general theoretical concerns with short-term diversity training, this section will draw on two case studies of applied prejudice-reduction interventions to explore the strengths and weaknesses of this type of approach.
The first empirical example took place in Australian workplaces with adults, and the second in the UK with children and adolescents in school and community settings. A central criticism regarding diversity training programmes is that they are rarely "guided by the theoretical models of learning or prejudice reduction" Paluck and Green Pendry et al further highlight the separation between theory and practice as they comment that despite diversity trainers and social psychologists having similar objectives i.
Moreover, diversity training programmes are often considered to have potential 'backlash' effects, perhaps as a result of the 'blanket' designs often applied, the short-term nature of most of these initiatives, and delivery not always being sensitive to its environment.
As discussed in the previous section, discussing group difference can be positive in terms of improving attitudes towards out-groups, however it is important that these discussions are handled carefully. Paluck suggests that diversity training courses might reinforce stereotypes, and actually 'backfire' by increasing, renewing or even fostering new sensitivities. Plaut et al suggest that majority participants may also in some cases feel excluded, for example if the emphasis is put on the celebration of minority cultures.
Yet a 'colour-blind' approach which suggests that everyone is equal is similarly problematic. As Abrams 72 comments, we know that everyone is not equal; there remain huge inequalities in all societies. Therefore, initiatives that 'pretend' everyone is equal and do not highlight difference and inequality might be seen to lack credibility and sophistication.
Pendry et al point out that diversity training "differs from the superordinate concept of diversity management in that it does not necessarily imply any background change in system-level structure, decision making or organization ethos" This is important: an organisation with management dominated by middle-class white men compelling its staff to attend 'diversity training' may appear insincere if a commitment to diversity is not shown in the institution as a whole.
Some general limitations of diversity training courses which are similar to those highlighted in the educational initiatives section are also worth mentioning.
Firstly, diversity training programmes are often not evaluated at all, or are evaluated by participants directly after sessions, making it impossible to track any long-term effect on attitudes or behaviours. It is also important to reiterate the point that real change is only possible if people are motivated to change:. This report so far has emphasised the point that people have to want to overcome prejudice, and that meaningful change will generally only occur over time.
It is questionable whether compulsory attendance at a workplace 'diversity' training course, for example, which may be one-day in length, and often shorter, would satisfy this criteria. One of the few academically-evaluated applied prejudice reduction programmes was published in , the culmination of research in Australian workplaces in the s: 'Stereotype Change and Prejudice Reduction: Short- and Long-term Evaluation of a Cross-cultural Awareness Programme' by Hill and Augoustinos.
Gaertner, S. Addressing contemporary racism: The common ingroup identity model. Reducing intergroup bias: The benefits of recategorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57 2 , — Galinsky, A. Perspective-taking: Decreasing stereotype expression, stereotype accessibility, and in-group favoritism.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78 4 , — Halpert, S. Suicidal behavior among gay male youth. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Psychotherapy, 6, 53— Jetten, J.
Strength of identification and intergroup differentiation: The influence of group norms. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27 5 , — Kaiser, C. Stop complaining! The social costs of making attributions to discrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, — Kawakami, K. Just say no to stereotyping : Effects of training in the negation of stereotypic associations on stereotype activation.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,78 5 , — Klonoff, E. Sexist discrimination may account for well-known gender differences in psychiatric symptoms. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24 , 93— Racial discrimination and psychiatric symptoms among blacks. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 5 4 , — Macrae, C. Out of mind but back in sight: Stereotypes on the rebound. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67 5 , — Madon, S. The accuracy and power of sex, social class, and ethnic stereotypes: A naturalistic study in person perception.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24 12 , — Mallett, R. Expect the unexpected: Failure to anticipate similarities leads to an intergroup forecasting error. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94 2 , — Neir, J. Changing interracial evaluations and behavior: The effects of a common group identity.
Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 4 , — Neuberg, S. Motivational influences on impression formation: Outcome dependency, accuracy-driven attention, and individuating processes.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53 , — Oreopolous, P. Why do skilled immigrants struggle in the labor market? American Economic Journal, 3 4 , Page-Gould, E. With a little help from my cross-group friend: Reducing anxiety in intergroup contexts through cross-group friendship.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95 5 , — Pettigrew, T. A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Richeson, J. Negotiating interracial interactions: Costs, consequences, and possibilities. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16 6 , — Rothbart, M.
Social categorization and behavioral episodes: A cognitive analysis of the effects of intergroup contact. Journal of Social Issues, 41 , 81— Rudman, L. Sechrist, G. Perceived consensus influences intergroup behavior and stereotype accessibility.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80 4 , — Shelton, J. Silence is not golden: The intrapersonal consequences of not confronting prejudice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Shelton, N.
Confronting perpetrators of prejudice: The inhibitory effects of social costs. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, — Sherif, M. Shook, N. Interracial roommate relationships: An experimental field test of the contact hypothesis. Psychological Science, 19 7 , — Sidanius, J. Social dominance orientation, gender, and increasing educational exposure. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36 7 , — Ethnic enclaves and the dynamics of social identity on the college campus: The good, the bad, and the ugly.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87 1 , 96— Stangor, C. Development and change of national stereotypes and attitudes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26 , — Stephan, W. Reducing prejudice and stereotyping in schools. Swim, J. Everyday sexism: Evidence for its incidence, nature, and psychological impact from three daily diary studies.
Journal of Social Issues, 57 1 , 31— Journal of Black Psychology, 29 1 , 38— Williams, D. Race, socioeconomics status, and health: The added effect of racism and discrimination. In Adler, N. Socioeconomic status and health: The challenge of the gradient. American Psychologist, 49 , Wright, S. The extended contact effect: Knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice.
0コメント