In society certain individuals may hold explicit

In
society certain individuals may hold explicit and implicit attitudes that are
of a prejudicial or discriminatory nature based on ones gender or race. The
Nature of Prejudice (Allport, 1954) is argued to be one of the first
starting points and being one of the most influential frameworks for exploring
prejudice.

This
was identified by using an independent measure design. 21 male and 20 female University
of Gloucestershire students, who were required to complete a Situational
Attitude Scale (1974) and The Modern Sexism Scale (1995) there were two
independent variables used. On the first attempt one variable was applied, and
on the second attempt the other variable was applied. Once completed, the aim
was to assess if these variables were a factor that would affect the applicant’s
thoughts or emotions they would feel in a particular scenario on a face value
basis. Ultimately, looking at the results and seeing how many applicants were
potentially prejudiced when it comes to an individual’s gender or race.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Rejecting the hypothesis,
results indicated a non-significant interaction on the participant being
prejudiced because of ones gender and ethnicity. There was a main effect of participants
who answered participants who felt more prejudiced ‘task difficulty’; participants
reported significantly more stress in the ‘difficult’ condition.  There was a non-significant main effect of
‘time’. These results provide important information about the role of task
difficulty on perceived stress scores.

 

Re DO THAT ^^^

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Introduction

Some suggest
that the definition of prejudice, discrimination and stereotyping have altered
over the years. Typically, prejudice is viewed as a negative attitude toward a
particular group of people. (Lippmann, 1922) Whereas, this differs from discrimination,
as a prejudiced person may choose to not act upon their views, whereas to be discriminatory
towards someone, this involves actual behaviour. (Rodgers,
W. M. 2009). There is a vast amount of evidence available that supports the argument
that society is filled with prejudice and discrimination throughout the years. A
notable example would be the homophobic views that the Russian government/
society have toward the LGBT society. Active discrimination is present as a
number of laws have been put in place that threatens to sanction any member of
society in violation of these laws. Any depictions of homosexuality are banned,
which included any organisation of pride parades and carrying the rainbow flag.
(Wilkinson, C 2014)

Some may argue that the reason individuals are prejudiced and discriminatory
towards certain members of society can be due to a number of factors. One being
could be how the media is used to fuel hateful stereotypes and prejudiced
views. The media is a significant influence on the people in the twenty first
century. Pop psychology tabloid newspapers such as The Sun can be used as a
notable example that fuels hateful views on certain social groups where a heading
of newspaper was published with the heading of ‘1 in 5 Muslims are Terrorist’ although
this statement can be interpreted differently, some may argue that this
generalises the belief that ‘most’ Muslims are terrorist. A statement was later
released stating that the story was misleading. (Worley, W 2016)

Other factors such
as the law is suggested to have made an impact on being
prejudice/discriminatory. An early case of this would be women being granted
equal voting rights to men in nineteen forty four, the decriminalisation of
homosexuality in nineteen sixty seven, and lastly when the Race Relations act
outlaws racial discrimination in nineteen seventy six. (UK Public General Acts.
n.d.)

 

Through this
movement, it was shown to the public that discrimination would not be
tolerated, and allowed the factors that lead to people discriminating such as
being prejudice and stereotypes to be taken more seriously.

Gender can be identified as a factor for an
individual to be prejudice against. When considering the stereotypes that convey
the image of woman holding the qualities of being supportive and warm, as
opposed to men being aggressive and domineering, some may suggest that new
theories imply that this bad/good gendered continuum may be apparent in an additional
social behaviour which is intergroup prejudice (Dozo, N 2015)

Research indicates that there are common
stereotypes that affect how one person may treat another based on their gender,
thus making them prejudice. For example, (Swim et al, 1995) Modern
Sexism Scale measures the attitude of people toward women. Results from this
scale showed that men who held racist/prejudice views also held sexist views
that showed discrimination against women. Therefore this study shows that race
and gender are factors that people are prejudice towards. (Fiske, T, S 2015) Ethnicity
has been recognised as an additional factor for an individual to be prejudice
against. Civil Rights Movement Leader Martin Luther King (1963) is argued to
have spoken one of the most influential and iconic speeches of time. ­He
touches deeply on the racial tensions of that time that black Americans were
going through. One of MLK quotes were “Let us all hope that the dark clouds of
racial prejudice will soon pass away” For example, The Situational Attitude
Scale (1974) was developed to measure the attitudes of white people towards
black people when in particular situations. Results showed that in the
situations where the participant would be closer to a black person, the more negative
the response would be (Sedlacek, W. E. 2017

To date there is little research into what causes prejudice
behaviour against ones ethnicity and gender. It could be suggested that this is
because prejudice is an attitude and is hard to address, it can only be truly
addressed when it becomes discrimination as the individual is acting upon their
thoughts through behaviour. Present studies explore the cause and effect on
prejudice behaviour, through measures such as questionnaires etc. Through the research
conducted, which is the Modern Sexism Scale and Situational Attitude scale
which both show that factors such as ethnicity and gender can cause people to
be prejudiced. However, more research was able to be found regarding race as
opposed to gender. Some may argue that this is due to the attention that has
been placed on the prejudicial views, for race relations is proving to be a
significant social problem in the United States.

The experimental hypotheses are that
individuals are prejudice because of your gender, because of your ethnicity,
and because of your ethnicity and gender

 

re do THESE

 

 

Method

Participants

A review
of existing literature does not specify an expected effect size, therefore, a
medium effect size was used to calculate prospective power. Applying Cohen’s
(1992) power primer it was calculated that for a probability level of .05 it
would be necessary to test a total of 180 participants (45 per level of each
factor). Due to time constraints, an opportunity sample of 81 undergraduate
students at the University of Gloucestershire (males, 20, females, 21, mean
age= 19.5 SD= 4.37) participated.

A 2×2 independent measures
factorial design was utilised. The first factor was ethnicity (white or black)
and the second factor gender (male or female)                      the dependent variable was
the score on an adaptation of the Situational Attitude Scale (see appendix A).administered
after the Modern Sexism Scale (see appendix b)

Materials

The Situational
Attitude Scale was implemented to try and measure if the participants held
implicit/explicit prejudice views in regards to one’s ethnicity i.e., a white person’s
attitude towards a black person. Participants completed a 100 item
questionnaire, however on some of the forms the word black was put into each
situation to see if race may be a variable in the participant’s reaction to the
situation, the forms were evenly distributed. The validity of the test was figured
out by the mean response between the two questionnaires by using t tests. Results shown by inserting the
word “black” into the five situations led to the participants responding more
negatively when race was mentioned. However, this did vary due to how close the
personal contact was towards the person of black ethnicity, if the personal
contact was distant, somewhat strong positive feelings were shown.

In addition,
(Swim et al, 1995) Modern Sexism Scale was used to see if the participant
showed any prejudiced attitudes due to someone’s gender. The procedure consists
of five items that are rated on a 7 point, Likert-type scale. It is based on
the traditional gender roles, the varying treatment of men and women, and the
stereo-types that surround females being not as competent as males.

These items
are derived from McConahay’s Old-Fashioned Racism Scale. Participants finished a
packet of racism questionnaires that were intended to reflect old
fashioned/sexism on the response scales. (1=strongly disagree, 9= strongly disagree)
and scale scores can range from 1-25 where the higher the score, represents
old-fashioned sexism.

 

 

Procedure

Participants
were allocated at random to the level of the factors which was ethnicity, white
or black and gender, male or female. The experiment took place in a lecture
theatre at the end of psychology lectures (permission sought and granted from
the lecturer) on two different occasions, based on whether the participants
were female or male. Participants completed the two measures individually. Participants
provided informed consent see appendix ??? ) and were made fully aware of their
right to withdraw both during and after the experiment. Participants were provided
with a copy of each of the scales used. To begin the process participants
completed the questionnaires with no time limit. They firstly completed the
Situational Attitude Scale, followed the Modern Sexism Scale. Once finished,
the particpants were de-briefed and thanked for their involvement. (See
Appendix ??? )

 

Results

The assumptions of the data were
that they were independent, there was homogeneity of variance and that the data
was normally distributed. The design was independent, as participants took part
in only one level of each factor. The sample of participants was homogenous as
Levene’s value was p = 0.93 (ns)
supporting the assumption of homogeneity of variance. Normal distribution was
checked using histograms (see appendix ). These appeared to indicate normal
distribution. Further screening was conducted in each condition by dividing the
skewness statistic by its standard error. 

 

 

Skewness

Kurtosis

Statistic

S/E

Value

Assumption
Satisfied Y/N

Statistic

S/E

Value

Assumption
Satisfied Y/N

Factor A cond 1 – Female

-.263

.550

0.49

Y

-1.355

1.063

-1.27

Y

Factor A cond 2 –
Male

.083

.481

0.17

Y

-1.695

.935

-1.81

Y

Factor B cond 1 –
White

-1.865

.524

-3.56

N

3.137

1.014

3.1

N

Factor B cond 2-
Black

1.304

.501

2.6

N

.611

.972

0.63

Y

 

 

In summary these screening
procedures show that the data were normally distributed. For independent
factors Levenes Test of Equality of Errors Variance (see appendix G) was
conducted, the sample of participants was not homogenous, p=0.93 (ns), meaning
that the assumption of homogeneity of variance can be rejected. Due to
violation of this assumption, the results need to be treated with caution.

To test whether gender and
ethnicity was a factor in prejudice behaviour a 2 (gender: female or male) x 2
(ethnicity: white or black) independent measures Factorial ANOVA was conducted
on perceived prejudice scores. There was a significant main effect of gender,
F(1,36) = .857, P

x

Hi!
I'm Dana!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out