Abstract
In this article, a study is presented that analyzed the effect of implicit and explicit prejudice, egalitarian values, and the type of a discussion host on the expression of prejudice in a group discussion. A total of 91 Norwegians from two towns were randomly assigned to 1 of 17 group discussions with a topic that made it likely that immigrants in Norway would be discussed. Six discussion groups had a Norwegian hosts; 11 had a non-Norwegian host. The number of positive and negative statements about immigrants made by each individual as well as the ratio of negative to total statements was regressed on implicit prejudice, explicit prejudice, egalitarian value orientation, discussion host type, and their interactions. It was controlled for age and gender of the participants. In discussion groups with non-Norwegian hosts, the number of negative and positive statements about immigrants was lower, but the effect was stronger for negative statements. Strong egalitarian values reduced the number of negative statements, whereas strong explicit prejudice reduced the number of positive statements.
Highlights
The prevalent societal norm is that the open expression of ethnic prejudice is unacceptable
The question we are trying to answer in this article is, whether societies such as the Norwegian through their history of developing and promoting egalitarianism strongly reduced their prejudice against immigrants or whether the strong embracement of egalitarian values just shifts the expression of prejudice from more open and blatant forms to subtleties
This study builds on the findings described in the sections above: Implicit and explicit prejudice make discriminating behavior more likely, egalitarian values make it less likely, and the types of audience moderates the relation between implicit prejudice and its expression in a social situation
Summary
The prevalent societal norm is that the open expression of ethnic prejudice is unacceptable. Research about prejudice and discrimination shows clearly that the expression of ethnic prejudice is sensitive to norms in the social context (e.g., Dovidio & Gaertner, 1986; Gaertner & Dovidio, 2005; Sherif, 1973; Sherif & Sherif, 1969; Zitek & Hebl, 2007) and the individual’s motivation to express prejudice (e.g., Fiske & Taylor, 1991; Gaertner & Dovidio, 2005; Greenwald & Banaji, 1995). In the case of Norway, equal rights and even equal distribution of resources among all members of society are among the most defining aspects of culture and open expression of prejudice is strongly sanctioned by society (Gullestad, 2002; Schwartz, 2007) This does not mean that Norwegians are free from ethnic prejudice. We will briefly introduce the relevant concepts used in the present study, distinguish between implicit and explicit prejudice, present previous findings about the role of norms and values suppressing expression of prejudice and discuss the effect of the audience on the expression of prejudice
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
