1 option
The psychology of modern prejudice / Melanie A. Morrison and Todd G. Morrison, editors.
- Format:
- Book
- Language:
- English
- Subjects (All):
- Prejudices.
- Attitude (Psychology).
- Physical Description:
- viii, 332 p. : ill. (some col.)
- Edition:
- 1st ed.
- Place of Publication:
- New York : Nova Science Publishers, c2008.
- Language Note:
- English
- Summary:
- Modern prejudice refers to the subtle negative attitudes that are directed toward stigmatised groups such as African-Americans and gay men and lesbian women. Individuals categorised as high in modern prejudice deny the existence of discrimination against stigmatised groups; believe that demands made by these groups are unfair; assert that social institutions accord disproportionate attention to such groups; and reject their efforts to change the status quo. Stated simply, the ethos of an individual high in modern prejudice is: "Discrimination is a thing of the past because groups now have all the rights they need." social scientists have devoted considerable attention to studying modern prejudice; however, no book has provided comprehensive coverage of this topic-until now. It also offers students and academics, as well as the interested layperson, a thorough review of modern prejudice; a construct that is at the centre of some of the most innovative studies currently conducted by psychologists.
- Contents:
- Intro
- THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN PREJUDICE
- NOTICE TO THE READER
- CONTENTS
- PREFACE
- AND SO THE PENDULUM SWINGS: A FRAMEWORK FOR CONCEPTUALIZING THE CAUSES OF PREJUDICE
- ABSTRACT
- INTRODUCTION
- The Pendulum Framework
- Quadrant 1: Maladjusted People
- Summary: Themes and Interventions
- Quadrant 2: Threat-Sensitive and Cognitively Rigid People
- Summary: Themes and Intervention
- Quadrant 3: Competitive Contexts and Status Quo Perpetuation
- Quadrant 4: Aggravated Conflict and Mortality Contexts
- CONCLUSION
- Utility of the Pendulum Framework
- Future Directions and Reflections
- REFERENCES
- COGNITIVE CONSISTENCY AND THE RELATION BETWEEN IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT PREJUDICE: RECONCEPTUALIZING OLD-FASHIONED, MODERN, AND AVERSIVE PREJUDICE
- FORMS OF PREJUDICE
- PROCESSES UNDERLYING EVALUATION
- Associative Versus Propositional Processes
- Cognitive Consistency
- RECONCEPTUALIZING FORMS OF PREJUDICE
- EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE
- Application to Racial Prejudice Using the Implicit Association Test
- Application to Racial Prejudice Using the Affect Misattribution Procedure
- Application to Weight Prejudice Using the Sequential Priming Task
- SUMMARY
- IMPLICATIONS OF THE MODEL
- Motivation to Control Prejudice
- Alternative Strategies for Maintaining Cognitive Consistency
- The Fourth Case
- Modern Weight Prejudice
- A New Perspective on Subtle Forms of Prejudice
- Strategies for Prejudice Reduction
- POLITICAL ORIENTATION AND CONTEMPORARY RACISM IN AMERICA
- THE KING AND SIMPSON CASES
- OUR INITIAL STUDY
- THE INTEGRATED MODEL OF RACISM
- OUR SUBSEQUENT STUDIES
- LIBERALS AND AVERSIVE RACISM
- Physiological Arousal
- Excuses.
- WHY ARE CONSERVATIVES AND LIBERALS DIFFERENT?
- IMPLICIT VERSUS EXPLICIT ATTITUDES
- WHAT ABOUT THE MODERATES?
- WHAT ABOUT PREJUDICE TOWARD OTHER GROUPS?
- Future Research
- Final Note
- THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MODERN AND IMPLICIT PREJUDICE
- Measures of Modern Prejudice
- Measures of Implicit Prejudice
- The Relationship between Modern and Implicit Prejudice
- STUDY 1
- METHOD
- Participants
- Implicit Association Test
- Pro-Black/Anti-Black Attitudes Questionnaire
- Political Support Scale
- Procedure
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- STUDY 2
- Quick Discrimination Index
- Motivation to Respond without Prejudice
- MEASURING RACIAL PREJUDICE IN A MULTIRACIAL WORLD: NEW METHODS AND NEW CONSTRUCTS
- CHAPTER OVERVIEW
- HIGHLIGHTS FROM PAST APPROACHES TO RACIAL PREJUDICE
- THE CURRENT RESEARCH LANDSCAPE ON RACIAL PREJUDICE
- Explicit Racial Prejudice Scales
- Tasks Designed to Assess Racial Prejudice
- Implicit Measures of Racial Prejudice
- Commonality Among Explicit, Task, and Implicit Approaches
- BENEFITS OF A MULTIPLE-PERCEIVER, MULTIPLE-TARGET CONFIGURATION
- A NEW MULTIDIMENSIONAL ARCHITECTURE AND APPROACH DELINEATED
- The First Facet: Multiple Response Options
- The Second Facet: Multiple Targets
- The Third Facet: Multiple Perceivers Using a Single Instrument
- IS A SINGLE INSTRUMENT FOR ASSESSING RACIAL PREJUDICE USEFUL OR NEEDED?
- ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES FROM A SINGLE INSTRUMENT WITH MULTIDIMENSIONAL ARCHITECTURE
- Ingroup Favoritism
- Outgroup Favoritism
- Outgroup Derogation
- Ingroup Derogation
- Traditional Prejudice (or Pro-Ingroup/Anti-Outgroup Prejudice)
- Inverse Prejudice (or Anti-Ingroup/Pro-Outgroup Prejudice)
- Ambivalence.
- Nonprejudice
- ASSESSING IMPLICIT COGNITIONS WITH A PAPER-FORMAT IMPLICIT ASSOCIATION TEST
- DESCRIPTION AND SOME SUCCESSFUL RESEARCH APPLICATIONS OF THE PAPER-FORMAT IAT
- Simulated Datasets
- POTENTIAL SCORING PROCEDURES
- RESULTS
- Correlations among Simulated Data Sets
- DISCUSSION
- STUDIES 2A AND 2B
- STUDY 2A
- Method
- PROCEDURE
- Preparation of Data for Analysis
- DEMONSTRATION OF IMPLICIT ATTITUDE
- Test-Retest Reliability
- Relationship between Paper and Computer IAT
- Comparing Scoring Procedures
- Effect of Potential Artifacts on Paper IAT Scores
- STUDY 2B
- Demonstration of Implicit Attitude
- The Paper-Format and Computer Versions of the IAT Assess a Single Construct
- AUTHORS' NOTE
- FEATURE-BASED GENDER STEREOTYPING: BEYOND CATEGORIZATION AND CONTROL?
- Empirical Evidence for Feature-Based Gender Stereotyping
- VISUAL CUES
- VOCAL CUES
- OLFACTORY CUES
- The Automaticity of Feature-Based Gender Stereotyping
- The Interplay of Category-Based and Feature-Based Gender Stereotyping
- SINGLISM - ANOTHER PROBLEM THAT HAS NO NAME: PREJUDICE, STEREOTYPES, AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST SINGLES
- The Rise of Singlehood
- Why Might People Hold Negative Stereotypes of Singles?
- OVERVIEW OF EXPERIMENTS AND SUMMARY OF PREDICTIONS
- EXPERIMENTS 1, 2, AND 3
- Results and Discussion
- EXPERIMENT 4
- CONCLUSION.
- Is Prejudice Against Singles a Uniquely American Phenomenon?
- Are Certain Types of Singles Perceived More Positively than Others?
- Do People Hold Negative Stereotypes about Singles on an Implicit Level?
- Are the Stereotypes of Singles Accurate?
- Discrimination Against Singles
- Perceptions of Discrimination Against Singles
- Who Practices Singlism and Why?
- The Failure to Recognize Singlism as a Prejudice
- IMPLICIT PRIDE AND PREJUDICE: A HETEROSEXUAL PHENOMENON?
- SELF-REPORT MEASURES OF HOMONEGATIVITY
- PROBLEMS WITH SELF-REPORT MEASURES
- IMPLICIT ATTITUDES
- THE IMPLICIT MEASUREMENT OF HOMONEGATIVITY
- THE IAT AND MODERATING VARIABLES
- FOCUSING ON THE MODERATING EFFECTS OF MOTIVATION
- SOME INCONSISTENCIES IN THE RESEARCH
- POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE IAT
- MODERN HETEROSEXISM AND SOCIAL DOMINANCE ORIENTATION: DO SUBDOMAINS OF HETEROSEXISM FUNCTION AS HIERARCHY-ENHANCING LEGITIMIZING MYTHS?
- SOCIAL DOMINANCE THEORY
- NOMENCLATURE
- MODERN HETEROSEXISM
- SOCIAL DOMINANCE ORIENTATION AND HETEROSEXISM
- SDO and Hostile Heterosexism
- SDO and Modern Heterosexism
- SOCIAL DOMINANCE ORIENTATION AND LESBIAN AND GAY RIGHTS
- HETEROSEXISM AND LESBIAN AND GAY RIGHTS
- Hostile Heterosexism and Lesbian/Gay Rights
- Modern Heterosexism and Lesbian/Gay Rights
- HYPOTHESES
- Social Dominance Orientation and Heterosexism
- Social Dominance Orientation and Lesbian and Gay Rights
- Heterosexism and Lesbian and Gay Rights
- MEDIATING ROLE OF HETEROSEXISM
- Measures and Instruments
- Subsample Differences
- Descriptive Statistics and Scale Score Reliabilities
- Mediation Results
- APPENDIX A
- REFERENCES.
- MODERN RAPE MYTHS: THE ACCEPTANCE OF MODERN MYTHS ABOUT SEXUAL AGGRESSION (AMMSA) SCALE
- MODERN FORMS OF PREJUDICE
- MODERN RAPE MYTHS: CONTENT AND MEASUREMENT
- The AMMSA Scale
- AMMSA SCALE VALIDATION
- Functions of Rape Myths: Classic Findings and Initial Evidence with the AMMSA Scale
- APPENDIX
- OLD-FASHIONED AND MODERN PREJUDICE TOWARD ABORIGINALS IN CANADA
- INSTITUTIONAL DISCRIMINATION
- INTERPERSONAL DISCRIMINATION
- COVERAGE OF ABORIGINAL ISSUES BY SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGISTS
- PURPOSE
- Preliminary Data Analysis
- Stereotype Ascriptions
- Prejudiced Attitudes
- Measures
- GENERAL DISCUSSION
- LIMITATIONS AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
- ABOUT THE AUTHORS
- EDITORS
- Melanie A. Morrison
- Todd G. Morrison
- CONTRIBUTORS
- Dermot Barnes-Holmes
- Gerd Bohner
- Paula M. Brochu
- Becky L. Choma
- Khaya D. Clark
- Claire Cullen
- Bella DePaulo
- John E. Edlund
- Victoria M. Esses
- Friederike Eyssel
- Bertram Gawronski
- Rebecca Harriman
- Helen C. Harton
- Jeremy D. Heider
- Janine Hertel
- Gordon Hodson
- Lisa Jewell
- Saera Khan
- Sei Jin Ko
- Kristin A. Lane
- Kristi M. Lemm
- Wendy Morris
- Paul R. Nail
- Brian Nosek
- David N. Sattler
- Sabine Sczesny
- Chuck Tate
- Lindsay Taylor
- N. Eugene Walls
- INDEX.
- Notes:
- Bibliographic Level Mode of Issuance: Monograph
- Includes bibliographical references and index.
- ISBN:
- 1-60876-253-X
- OCLC:
- 433650435
The Penn Libraries is committed to describing library materials using current, accurate, and responsible language. If you discover outdated or inaccurate language, please fill out this feedback form to report it and suggest alternative language.