Beyond prejudice: Relational inequality, collective action, and social change revisited

2012 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 451-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Dixon ◽  
Mark Levine ◽  
Steve Reicher ◽  
Kevin Durrheim
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Intergroup Relations ◽  
Prejudice Reduction ◽  
Dominant Group ◽  
Negative Attitudes ◽  
Main Target ◽  
Subordinate Group ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Intergroup Inequality

AbstractThis response clarifies, qualifies, and develops our critique of the limits of intergroup liking as a means of challenging intergroup inequality. It does not dispute that dominant groups may espouse negative attitudes towards subordinate groups. Nor does it dispute that prejudice reduction can be an effective way of tackling resulting forms of intergroup hostility. What it does dispute is the assumption that getting dominant group members and subordinate group members to like each other more is the best way of improving intergroup relations that are characterized by relatively stable, institutionally embedded, relations of inequality. In other words, the main target of our critique is the model of change that underlies prejudice reduction interventions and the mainstream concept of “prejudice” on which they are based.

The AMIGAS Model: Reconciling Prejudice Reduction and Collective Action Approaches Through a Multicultural Commitment in Intergroup Relations

2021 ◽  
pp. 108926802110563
Author(s):  
Ana Urbiola ◽  
Craig McGarty ◽  
Rui Costa-Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Collective Action ◽  
Intergroup Relations ◽  
Social Protest ◽  
Prejudice Reduction ◽  
Intercultural Dialogue ◽  
Negative Attitudes ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
Intergroup Inequality ◽  
Reduction Approach ◽  
Policies And Practices

Social psychology’s search for ways to address intergroup inequality has grappled with two approaches that have been considered incompatible: (a) the prejudice reduction approach, that argues that changing individual negative attitudes will undermine the basis for discrimination and lead to intergroup harmony; and (b) the collective action approach, that argues that social protest and activism can improve the position of disadvantaged groups. The problem is that efforts toward prejudice reduction may serve to suppress genuine efforts to change. We propose the Achieving Multicultural Integration of Groups Across Society (AMIGAS) model, in which a multicultural commitment is proposed as a driver of both improved intergroup evaluations and promotion of collective action for reduced inequality, especially in contexts where there are conditions for a respectful intercultural dialogue. The AMIGAS model is a theoretical advance in the field of intergroup relations and a basis for implementing effective egalitarian policies and practices.

Are attitudes the problem, and do psychologists have the answer? Relational cognition underlies intergroup relations

2012 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 449-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sven Waldzus ◽  
Thomas W. Schubert ◽  
Maria-Paola Paladino
Keyword(s):  
Collective Action ◽  
Intergroup Relations ◽  
Prejudice Reduction ◽  
Psychological Processes ◽  
Negative Attitudes

AbstractThe focus on negative attitudes toward other groups has led to a dichotomy between the prejudice reduction and the collective action approach. To solve the resulting problems identified by Dixon et al., we suggest analyzing the psychological processes underlying the construction of relationships (and their alternatives) between own and other groups.

scholarly journals Whites for racial justice: How contact with Black Americans predicts support for collective action among White Americans

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 893-912 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hema Preya Selvanathan ◽  
Pirathat Techakesari ◽  
Linda R. Tropp ◽  
Fiona Kate Barlow
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Intergroup Contact ◽  
Black Americans ◽  
White Americans ◽  
Racial Justice ◽  
Group Efficacy ◽  
Total N ◽  
Group Members ◽  
White Guilt

Advantaged group members have an important role to play in creating social change, and intergroup contact has tremendous implications in shaping intergroup relations. However, little research has examined how intergroup contact predicts advantaged group members’ inclinations toward collective action to support the interests of disadvantaged groups. The present research investigates how contact with Black Americans shapes White Americans’ willingness to engage in collective action for racial justice and support for the Black Lives Matter movement. Three studies of White Americans (total N = 821) consistently reveal that positive contact with Black Americans predicts greater support for collective action through a sequential process of fostering greater feelings of empathy for Black Americans and anger over injustice. These findings hold even when taking into account other relevant psychological factors (i.e., White guilt and identification, negative contact, group efficacy, and moral convictions). The present research contributes to our understanding of how advantaged group members come to engage in social change efforts.

scholarly journals Walking in My Shoes: Imagined Synchrony Improves Attitudes Towards Out-groups

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gray Atherton ◽  
Liam Cross
Keyword(s):  
Social Exclusion ◽  
Intergroup Relations ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
Social Effects ◽  
Equal Opportunities ◽  
Negative Attitudes ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Group Members

Abstract People are prone to dividing others into the categories of ‘us’ and ‘them’. This can be particularly detrimental to minorities who may experience social exclusion, prejudice, and reduced access to equal opportunities. One method of improving intergroup relations is to create opportunities for contact. Common contact interventions have members of different groups meet and engage in conversation. There are also non-verbal embodied intergroup activities that produce the same effects. Previous work has shown that the pro-social effects of coordination may be linked to whether co-actors are classed as in or out-group members. The current study explored whether imagining walking in synchrony with in- or out-group members changed majority members’ attitudes towards those individuals. Imagining walking in synchrony fostered greater increases in empathy and decreases in negative attitudes only towards minority group members following imagined coordination (not in-groups). Implications and future directions are discussed.

scholarly journals Intergroup Contact and Social Change: An Integrated Contact-Collective Action Model

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tabea Hässler ◽  
Özden Melis Uluğ ◽  
Mariska Kappmeier ◽  
Giovanni A. Travaglino
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Intergroup Contact ◽  
Sedative Effect ◽  
Social Intervention ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Action Model ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Positive Contact ◽  
The Many

Previous research has shown that positive intergroup contact among disadvantaged groupmembers may predict a so-called ‘sedative’ effect according to which positive contact isassociated with reduced support for social change. Conversely, positive contact is associatedwith increased support for social change toward equality among advantaged group members.This raises the important question of under which circumstances intergroup contact canencourage support for social change among both disadvantaged and advantaged groups. Inthis theoretical article, we tackle this question by introducing a new Integrated Contact-Collective Action Model (ICCAM). We first provide an up-to-date review of how intergroupcontact may promote or hinder social change for both disadvantaged and advantaged groups.We, then, use ICCAM to examine when the many forms of intergroup contact promote orhinder support for social change, proposing the existence of two different paths fordisadvantaged and advantaged group members. Finally, we discuss the implications of themodel for social intervention and make policy recommendations stemming from a review ofavailable evidence.

scholarly journals Prejudice reduction, collective action, and then what?

2012 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 425-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic Abrams ◽  
Milica Vasiljevic ◽  
Hazel M. Wardrop
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Intergroup Relations ◽  
Prejudice Reduction ◽  
Levels Of Analysis ◽  
Potential Conflict ◽  
Conflict Escalation ◽  
Multiple Levels

AbstractDespite downsides, it must, on balance, be good to reduce prejudice. Despite upsides, collective action can also have destructive outcomes. Improving intergroup relations requires multiple levels of analysis involving a broader approach to prejudice reduction, awareness of potential conflict escalation, development of intergroup understanding, and promotion of a wider human rights perspective.

“Let Them Eat Harmony”

2010 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 76-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Dixon ◽  
Linda R. Tropp ◽  
Kevin Durrheim ◽  
Colin Tredoux
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Social Inequality ◽  
Prejudice Reduction ◽  
Disadvantaged Group ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
Group Members

Research on intergroup prejudice has generally adopted a model of social change that is based around the psychological rehabilitation of members of advantaged groups in order to foster intergroup harmony. Recent studies of prejudice-reduction interventions among members of disadvantaged groups, however, have complicated psychologists’ understanding of the consequences of inducing harmonious relations in historically unequal societies. Interventions encouraging disadvantaged-group members to like advantaged-group members may also prompt the disadvantaged to underestimate the injustice suffered by their group and to become less motivated to support action to challenge social inequality. Thus, psychologists’ tendency to equate intergroup harmony with “good relations” and conflict with “bad relations” is limited.

Echoing the call to move “beyond prejudice” in search of intergroup equality

2012 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 450-451
Author(s):  
Stephen C. Wright ◽  
Lisa M. Bitacola
Keyword(s):  
Collective Action ◽  
Intergroup Relations ◽  
Group Interaction ◽  
Prejudice Reduction ◽  
Interpersonal Processes ◽  
Interpersonal Dynamics ◽  
Psychological Constructs

AbstractWe also critique the myopic focus on prejudice reduction, but we do not support the call for a reconceptualization of prejudice. Redefining key psychological constructs is unproductive. Also, we point to interpersonal dynamics in cross-group interaction as a key mechanism in the prejudice reduction/collective action paradox and point to solutions involving intrapersonal/interpersonal processes, as well as broader structural intergroup relations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document