Sam Gaertner

Sam Gaertner

University of Delaware

From Aversive Racism to the Common Ingroup Identity Model

Prejudice

Can exist among well-intentioned people with liberal, egalitarian values and non-prejudiced

self-images.

Can involve unacknowledged negative feelings (anxiety, uneasiness) about outgroups as well as more acknowledged positive

feelings about ingroups (see Meertens and Pettigrew) and beliefs about ingroup superiority over people

in other groups.

Can function automatically, without intention such that people are not aware

that they are discriminating.

Prejudice

Can also exist among ill-intentioned people who represent the open flame of intergroup

conflict and hatred.

But the focus today is on Prejudiceamong the more well-intentioned

who are AVERSE to racism and sexismespecially their own

BUT who have not completely escaped cultural, cognitive and motivational forces.

Motivation in Intergroup situations

Don’t think bad thoughts Don’t have bad feelings Don’t behave improperly (Don’t Discriminate)

A costly strategy Interaction + Rebound

Avoid Acting Inappropriately i.e., in prejudicial ways

People Can DISCRIMINATE

In subtle, unintentional, rationalizable ways that preclude them from recognizing that they discriminated.

Predictions: No discrimination

In situations that have clear social norms to guide behavior.

Discrimination is more likely to occur: When social norms are weak or

ambiguous. When factors other race or sex

unintentionally can be used to rationalize unfavorable behavior.

“Sorry, Wrong Number” Study

Calls to Liberal and Conservative Party Members 1970 “Hello, Ralph’s Garage. This is George (or Mrs.)

Williams and I’m stuck out here on the parkway.”

When norms are STRONG and When norms are WEAK

“Sorry, you got the wrong number…this isn’t a garage.”

Predictions:

% Helping by Liberal and Conservative Party Members

0102030405060708090

100

Liberals Conservatives

Pe

rce

nt

He

lpin

g

Whites

Blacks

% Premature Hang-ups by Liberal and Conservative Party Members

02468

101214161820


Pe

rce

nt

Pre

ma

ture

Ha

ng

-up

s

White Motorists

Black Motorists

% Helping by Liberal and Conservative Party Members

0102030405060708090

100


Pe

rce

nt

He

lpin

g

Whites

Blacks

When Social Norms Are Strong

% Premature Hang-ups by Liberal and Conservative Party Members

02468

101214161820


Pe

rce

nt

Pre

ma

ture

Ha

ng

-up

s

White Motorists

Black Motorists

When Social Norms Are Weak

% Helping by Whites and Blacks

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Whites Blacks

Pe

rce

nt

He

lpin

g

Tom Scott

Israel Goldstein

Subtle Anti-Semitism?

% Premature Hang-ups by Whites and Blacks

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Whites Blacks

Per

cen

t Pre

mat

ure

Han

g-u

ps

Tom Scott

Israel Goldstein

A Test of the Normative Structure Hypothesis

When norms (to help) are weak -- DISCRIMINATION

When norms (to help) are Strong – NO DISCRIMINATION

That is, Whites would NOT discriminate when a failure to help would be inappropriate

What if someone needs help because:

A) She chose to play rather than work

B) She was working, but she had a very difficult task

In which instance are the norms to help stronger?

Why is help needed – and who asks for help?

0102030405060708090

100

Partner Asks 3rd Party Asks

BlackWhite

Partner Playing Rather than Working

0102030405060708090

100


BlackWhite

Difficult Task

Why is help needed – and who asks for help?

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80


BlackWhite

Partner Playing Rather than Working

0102030405060708090

100


BlackWhite

Difficult Task

0102030405060708090

100

Accept Help Ask for Help

BlackWhite

Accepting or Asking For Help

Reversal – Participant Needs HelpAnd He Has a Black or White Partner

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Accept Help Ask for Help

BlackWhite

Accepting or Asking For Help

Reversal – Participant Needs HelpAnd He Has a Black or White

Partner

Presence of Other Bystanders:

A non-race related reason to remain inactive?

Diffusion of Responsibility During an Emergency

0102030405060708090

100

Alone Together

Per

cent

Hel

ping

White Victim

Black Victim

Changes In Heart-Rate: 1st Ten Seconds

-5

0

5

10

15

Alone Together

White Victim

Black Victim

Discrimination In Employment Decisions

Subtle attitudes can affect how qualificationsare perceived and weighted in a manner that

disadvantages minority applicants

No Discrimination when Black or White candidates’qualifications are clearly strong or clearly weak

Predictions:

Discrimination when candidates’ qualifications are moderate or ambiguous

Study 1: Aversive Racism and Selection Decisions

Percentage of students recommending a Black and

White candidate for a peer counseling position

Qualifications Strong

Moderate Weak

Self Descriptions

Leadership Experience

Advice to Pregnant Student

SensitiveIntelligentRelaxed

CaptainSwim Team

In High SchoolAnd

Member of Disciplinary Board

Explain options andAsk if she wants #Of Health Center

SensitiveIntelligentEmotional

Co-CaptainSwim Team

In High School

Ask if she wants #Of Health Center

IndependentForthright

Intense

Co-CaptainChess Team

In High School

It’s too personal andShe must talk with her

parents

Dovidio & Gaertner, 2000

0102030405060708090

100

Strong Moderate Weak

BlackWhite

Study 1: Subtle Discrimination and Selection Decisions:





0102030405060708090

100


BlackWhite

1989

0102030405060708090

100


BlackWhite

1999

Subtle Discrimination in Selection Decisions:

1989 and 1999

Credentials: SAT Scores Grades

Study 2: Black and White Applicants to College

Strong Qualifications High High_____

Weak Qualifications Low Low

_____

Ambiguous QualificationsHigh

Low

Low High__________

_____Mixed or

orAmbiguous QualificationsHigh

Low

Low High__________

Hodson, Dovidio & Gaertner (2002)

0102030405060708090

100

Strong Mixed Weak

BlackWhite

Subtle Prejudice amongCollege Students

College Admission Decisions

% who recommended admission

Higher Prejudice Scorers – who see themselves as non prejudiced

Did people weigh the admission criteria in a manner that disadvantaged the Black Candidate?

When Credentials Were Ambiguous

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4Strong Mixed Mixed Weak

SATGRADES

Grades SAT

HighHighLowLow

How important areSAT scores and Grades for

College Admission Decisions?

Black Candidates

LowLowHig

h

High

Rank orderin

importance

Is Resistance to Affirmative Action Subtle Racism?

Is this objection to affirmative action -- Myth or Reality?

“The problem with AFFIRMATIVE ACTION is that Blacks and other minorities (perhaps even an MBA

or Geologist :) with lower ability will be hired, or worse, become my supervisor.”

If this is Reality – then people should respond unfavorablyto Black supervisors who are lower in ability than themselves

--

But respond favorably to Black supervisors who are higher in ability than themselves

So we designed an experiment to find out?

We arranged for White male college students to interact with:

A Black or White male Partner who became their Supervisor or their Workerand who had either Higher or Lower job related ability than themselves.

Then we measured these students’ reactions to these situations

Pencils are not only for writing.

WHITE PARTNER

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Supervisor Worker

% H

EL

PIN

G

Higher Ability

Lower Ability

Is Resistance to AA based primarily on Race, Role, or Ability?

BLACK PARTNER

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Supervisor Worker

% H

ELP

ING

Higher Ability

Lower Ability

WHITE PARTNER

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Supervisor Worker

% H

EL

PIN

G

Higher Ability

Lower Ability

BLACK PARTNER

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Supervisor Worker

% H

EL

PIN

G

Higher Ability

Lower Ability

Suggests: Resistance to AA based on Race and Role – Not Ability

FEMALE PARTNER

0102030405060708090

100

Supervisor Worker

% H

ELP

ING

Higher Ability

Lower Ability

How can we reduce this formof bias?

How can we create a connection to outgroup members

How can we bring people’s behavior intoalignment with their non-prejudiced

Self–images?

neighborhood

INDIVIDUAL GROUP

family

city

nation

race

humanity

Tajfel’s Identity Continuum and

Allport’s Circles of Inclusion

An Experiment:What if members of two groups

conceived of themselves as:

One Group

Two Groups

Separate Individuals

Predictions

or

“The attractiveness of an individual is not constant, but varies

with ingroup membership” (Turner, et al., 1987).

Two Groups

Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++

One Group

Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++

One Group

Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++

One Group

Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++

One Group

Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++

One Group

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++Self

One Group

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++Self

Two Groups

Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++


Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++


Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++


Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++


Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++


Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++


Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++


Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++


Self

Posi

tive

Evalu

ati

on

+++

videoA

AA

B

B

B

a

a

a

b

bb

One Group

Delaware

“The Ramboettes and the Lost-in-the-Woods

are merged together to Become the Stars.”

video

video AAA

BB

B

a

a

a

b

bb

Two Groups

“The Ramboettes and the Lost-in-the-Wodds”

video

A

AA

B

B

B

a

a

a

b

bb


Changing Perceptions of Group Boundaries

55.15.25.35.45.55.65.75.85.9

OneGroup

TwoGroups

SeparatePeople

Eva

luat

ion Ingroup members

Outgroupmembers

Toward Reducing Bias

Changing Perceptions of Group BoundariesWith 9 and 10-year-old Portuguese Black and White Children

2.5

3

3.5

One Grp Two Grps Individs

Sim

ilar

ity

to S

elf

In Group

Out Group

Rebelo, Guerra and Monteiro (2004)Rebelo, Guerra and Monteiro (2004)

ISCTE: Lisbon, Portugal

What factors increase theinclusiveness of group

boundaries?

Contact Conditions

Cooperation

Equal Status

Self-Revealing Interactions

Egalitarian Norms

More Positive

Beliefs

Feelings

Behaviors

Toward

Outgroup members

Favorable Contact Conditions lead to more positive attitudes toward outgroup

members – but how psychologically does this happen?

The Contact Hypothesis

?

One Group

Re-categorization

One Group Composed ofTwo SubgroupsRe-categorization(us & them) = WE

WE

Two Groups

Categorization

Us & Them

Individuals

Contact Conditions

Cooperation

Equal Status


Egalitarian Norms

More Positive Beliefs Feelings Behaviors TowardOutgroup Members

The Common Ingroup Identity Model and the Contact Hypothesis

Causes Mediators Consequences

Me & You

Dual Identity

One Group

Re-categorization


WE

Two Groups

Categorization

Us & Them

Individuals

Contact Conditions

Cooperation*

Equal Status


Egalitarian Norms




Me & You

Dual Identity

No Cooperation Cooperation One Two One Two Group Groups Group Groups

How does cooperation reduce bias?

No Cooperation One Two Group Groups

No Cooperation One Two Group Groups

How much does it feel like one group (1 – 7)two groups, separate individuals?

How much do you like (1 – 7) each person. How trustworthy, similar to self, valuable?

video

video AAA

BB

B

a

a

a

b

bb

Two Groups:

“The Ramboettes and the Lost-in-the-Woods”

No Cooperation

videoA

AA

B

B

B

a

a

a

b

bb

One Group:

Delaware

“The Ramboettes and the Lost-in-the-Woods

are merged together to Become the Stars.”

No Cooperation

No Cooperation Cooperation Two Two Groups Groups

If it would otherwise be TWO GROUPS --- what does Cooperative Interaction DO?

One Group

Re-categorizationWE

Cooperation

NO YES

More Positive Evaluation of

Outgroup Members

.69



.47

.62

.09

One Group

Re-categorization


WE

Two Groups

Categorization

Us & Them

Individuals

Contact Conditions

Cooperation

Equal Status


Egalitarian Norms




Me & You

Dual Identity

Survey Studies

A Laboratory Experiment

Can a common ingroup identity change inter-racial evaluations and behavior?

Individuals Same Team

Common Team Membership and Evaluation

WhitePartner

BlackPartner

Individuals

Eva

luat

ion

5.5

5.0

4.5

4.0

3.5

3.0

Same Team

A (Football) Field Experiment

Fans (primarily White)FromWestchester State University University of Delaware

Surveyor’sRace Black White

UniversityAffiliation

WSUHat

U of DHat

WSUHat

U of DHat

A (Football) Field Experiment

WhiteInterviewer

BlackInterviewer

DifferentUniversity

Ag

ree

to B

eS

urv

eye

d

65%

60%

55%

50%

45%

40%

35%

30%

SameUniversity

Can Common Ingroup Identity change the Motivational Orientation toward

Racial Outgroup members?

From: Don’t Do Wrong (Aversive Racism) Stereotype Suppression After Suppression: Stereotype Rebound,

i.e., greater accessibility of negative relative to positive thoughts.

To: DO Right No Suppression No Rebound

Stroop Color-Naming Task

Premise: The more available the meaning of the word

the more interference it creates, and thus the longer it takes to recognize the color

the word is printed in.

IS THE WORD PRINTED IN RED OR YELLOW?

Stroop Test isAdministered – BEFORE and AFTER

the experiment

LAZY

SMART

GOOD

HOSTILE

Do The Right Thing: Benefits of a Common Ingroup Identity

Motivational Instructions

Avoid Do Same No

Doing Wrong Right Team Instructions

White Partner

-100

-50

0

50

100

White Partner

Avoid Do Same NoWrong Right Team Instructions

(-) WordsMore Available

(+) WordsMore Available

Black Partner

-100

-50

0

50

100

Black Partner

Avoid Do Same No Wrong Right Team Instructions

(-) WordsMore Available

(+) WordsMore Available

Can the principle of a more inclusive common identity have utility in the REAL

WORLD?

Cooperative Learning

Green Circle

GREEN CIRCLE: ELEMENTARY SCHOOL INTERVENTION

A GREEN CIRCLE facilitator usually pays four visits to each class for 40 minutes per visit over a four week period.

Guiding Assumption: Helping children bring people from different groups conceptually into their own circle of caring and sharing fosters appreciation of their common humanity as well as appreciation of group differences.

This program seems theoretically complementary to the Common Ingroup Identity Model. An Evaluation + Test of the Theory

Goals: Inclusion, self-esteem, similarities & differences, conflict resolution, decision making, feelings of empathy.

Delaware Region, National Conference for Community and Justice

School Intervention:

“Green Circle is a program that’s about you, people, the feelings we all have, and ways we are alike and ways we are different.”

“Whenever you see the Green Circle, I want you to think about your world

of people. The people you care about and the people who care about you.”

“This figure stands for the important person in your world of caring and sharing. This figure is YOU.”

“You each have the big job of deciding who’s going to be in your circle,how you treat people, and how big your circle will grow.”

“Now let’s talk about some of the people you may have included in your circle……”

“These figures represent your family..those who live with you and those who live in other places”

“How many of you have brothers? Sisters? How many of you live with your Grandmother? Grandfather?”

“How many of you have a Step-mother? Step-father? Step-sister?”

“Look! What has happened to your circle? It’s too small.”

“It needs to grow. Yes, your circle grows when you care about people. Here you are with your family.”

“Since you know how it feels to be outside the circle, perhaps you can understand how other people feel when they are outside the

circle.”

“Think about a time when you felt outside the circle ….. how did you feel?”

“One way people are different is their size and shape. Have you ever felt outside the circle because of your size or

shape? Have you ever been called a name because of your size or shape (e.g., fatso)?”

“Each of us has a skin color that is different and unique. Have you ever been treated differently because your skin color is

different?”

“Some of us are girls and some of us are boys. Have you ever been told you can’t do something because you’re a girl…or a boy?”

“All of us belong to one family – the human family.”

Pre Test Intervention Post Test

Evaluation Design899 1st and 2rd Grade children in

61 classes in 10 Elementary Schools in 3 school districts

X X X

X X

764 Children in 52 Classes

35 Reg. 17 Enhanced

135 Children in 9 classes

Control Condition

Regular & Enhanced

Control

Sample Characteristics

60% White

30% Black

6.0% Hispanic

2.5% Asian

1.0% American Indian

.5% Other

Group Enhanced Condition

Visual Similarity: Each child wore a vest with a green circle (front and back).

Interdependence: “At the end of our visits if most of the vests are neat, everyone can keep his or hers as a gift.”

Green Tape placed around the perimeter of the room encircling the class.

Poster with children’s names included within a Green Circle.

1

Very Little

2

A Little

3

A LittleBit More

4

A Lot

5

A Whole Lot

How much does your class feel like a team?

Manipulation Check

Regular = 4.37 Enhanced = 4.50 p = .16

EVALUATION SESSION

Each child was given a test booklet specially prepared for him or her which identified the child’s ethnicity, gender and body size.

Children were tested together in class and the session was conducted by a person who was experienced working with groups of young children.

This person was unaware that some classes received the Regular and others the Group Enhanced version of the Green Circle Program.

85% of eligible children’s parents provided informed consent for their children to participate.

very sad

a little sad

not sad or happy

a little happy

very happy

How would you feel about playing with this child who is the same age as yourself?

8 drawings are shown that vary: Race, Gender, and Body Size

Which child would you most like to play with?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

very sad

a little sad

not sad or happy

a little happy

very happy

How would you feel about playing with this child who is the same age as yourself?

8 drawings are shown that vary: Race, Gender, and Body Size

NONE

22. If you have 6 pieces of bubble gum, how many pieces of your gum would you give this child?

Sharing

Which child would you most like to play with?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Assume that I am a seven year old, white, average weight boy, how many characteristics in terms of Race, Gender and Body Size

do I have in common with this Child?

ZERO – In this regard we are very different

How many of these characteristics do I have in common with this child?

THREE. In this regard, we are very similar.

Scores can range from 0 – 3 characteristics in common

Number of Characteristics in Common with First Play Choice at Time 1 and Time 2

0

1

2

3

Regular Enhanced Control

Green Circle Condition

Nu

mb

er

of

Ch

ara

cte

ris

tic

s i

n

Co

mm

on

Pre

Post

nsp < .025 ns

Benefits of a Common Ingroup Identity

Increased positive thoughts, feelings and behaviors toward outgroup members (including racial

outgroup members).Appears to change the motivational orientation toward racial outgroup members from “Avoid Wrong-doing” to “Do Right.”

After Green Circle, children were more willing to consider a child different than themselves in ethnicity and gender as the child they would most want to play with (effect size r = .37).

The effects of Common Ingroup Identity are robust across

laboratory and natural groups, across people of different

ages, in different countries.And -- the effects seem to generalize to the

outgroup as a whole and across time

Future Plans

1. Understand the conflicting evidence regarding the dual identityrepresentation.

2. Understand the relation between the one group and dual identity representations and attitudes among racial majority

and minority students.

3. Extend the Common Ingroup Identity work into applied settings including the doctor-patient relationship – as well

as continue our work with the school intervention programs.

Documents

Sam Gaertner