Suchergebnisse

A distinction between personality & S-cul factors is employed to interpret prejudice data from the Union of South Africa & the southern US. Summaries of res in these areas are presented & 2 new studies are undertaken: (1) in South Africa, 627 S's of the English-speaking U of Natal were given the F scale, a soc conformity scale, & an anti-African scale & asked questions re their backgrounds, & (2) PO polling techniques were employed with 366 randomly selected white adults in 8 roughly matched communities in the North & South of the US, including F & A-S scales, & a Negro prejudice scale. Results indicate that factors such as authoritarianism are associated with prejudice in both samples at levels roughly comparable with other areas. Moreover, there is no indication that a greater potential for prejudice exists in these areas than in more tolerant areas. In both samples, the antiblack cultural norm seems to be of crucial importance. 'S-cul factors which reflect the mores consistently relate to prejudice - place of birth, pol'al party preference, upward mobility, & ethnic group membership in the South African data; & sex, church attendance, soc mobility, pol'al party identification, armed service, & educ in the southern data.' It is therefore suggested that 'in areas with historically imbedded traditions of racial intolerance, externalizing personality factors underlying prejudice remain important, but S-cul factors are unusually crucial & account for the heightened racial hostility.' I. Taviss.

The single factor fallacy occurs when social scientists model their applied work largely around a single factor. The problem generally arises when either a highly relevant theory is ignored or when missing key variables distort the results. Examples of this fallacy are drawn from the expanding research literature on intergroup contact, where we discuss the implications of missing critical variables from the analysis (including segregation, effects of negative as well as positive contact, extended contact, and contact when the outgroup is in the majority). The policy issues involved include racially desegregated schools, minority protest, the impact of neighborhood diversity, and anti‐immigration voting. Three suggestions for avoiding the fallacy are emphasized—the use of mediation–moderation analysis, longitudinal research, and multilevel analysis. We end by outlining five simple principles, based on our own experience in the United States and the United Kingdom, that may increase the impact of social scientists' research on public policy.

The origins of intergroup contact theory -- Does intergroup contact typically reduce intergroup prejudice? -- Do intergroup contact effects generalize? -- Are the effects of intergroup contact universal? -- When does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? -- How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? -- Does intergroup contact reduce all aspects of prejudice? -- Does cross-group friendship play a special role in reducing prejudice? -- Does group status moderate contact effects? -- Intergroup contact as one of many predictors of prejudice -- Criticisms of intergroup contact theory -- When intergroup contact fails -- Summing up and looking to the future

From the publisher. Research and theory on intergroup contact have become one of the fastest advancing and most exciting fields in social psychology in recent years. The work is exciting because it combines basic social psychological concerns -- human interaction, situational influences on behavior -- with an effective means of improving intergroup relations at a time when the world is witnessing widespread intergroup hatred and strife. This volume provides an overview of this rapidly progressing area of investigation -- its origins and early work, its current status and recent developments, along with criticisms of this work and suggestions for future directions. It covers a range of research findings involving contact between groups drawn from the authors' extensive meta-analysis of 515 published studies on intergroup contact. This meta-analysis, together with the authors' renowned research on intergroup contact, provides a solid foundation and broad overview of the field, to which have been added discussions of research extensions and emerging directions. When Groups Meet is a rich, comprehensive overview of classic and contemporary work on intergroup contact, and provides insights into where this work is headed in the future. For research specialists, this volume not only serves as a sourcebook for research and theory on intergroup contact, it also provides the entire 515-item bibliography from the meta-analysis. The clear structure and accessible writing style will also appeal to advanced undergraduate and graduate students in psychology and other social sciences.

2 separate trends in soc psychol are drawn upon: that concerned with the subjective aspects of soc stratification; & that which studies the r's of racial att's. A broad survey of the literature in these areas shows that the concept of relative deprivation has proved most useful in the analyses of Amer race relations. Data gathered in 12 separate surveys of blacks & whites in 4 US cities where competent black candidates have run for mayor are presented in an analysis of 'fraternal deprivation' & the racial att's of whites in Ur America. In summary, it is found that "across city, educ'al, & age samples, contact racism is strongest among those who individually regard their econ gains as inferior to the gains of blacks; white competitive racism is strongest among those who collectively regard white econ gains as inferior to the gains of blacks." 5 major conclusions are drawn: (1) The distinction between egoistic & fraternalistic deprivation is vital. The key form of relative deprivation which produces soc unrest is group-to-group, fraternalistic comparison. (2) Special resistance to racial change in Ur America today is centered among the affluent workers & the fraternally deprived. Resistance to black mayorality candidates is particularly found among those who feel their racial group (whites) is deprived relative to blacks. (3) Negative individual evaluations in comparison with black Amer's, as exemplified by both the doubly & the fraternally deprived, tend towards contact racism involving an expressed aversion to reasonably intimate interracial contact. (4) The incidence of fraternal deprivation is greatest at intermediate econ levels. (5) Future res should (a) measure perceived deprivation in a wide variety of ways; (b) draw sharp distinctions between various types of deprivation; & (c) divide the dependent variable of prejudice into its several components. 12 Tables. M. Maxfield.