Analysis Of Prejudice Research Articles

Hermeneutics after Ricoeur

Hermeneutics after Ricoeur

Hermeneutics at the Time of the Anthropocene: The Case of Hans-Georg Gadamer

The article puts forward the thesis that Hans-Georg Gadamer's hermeneutics can be useful for conceptualising the issue of the Anthropocene. Both speculative features of hermeneutics generally and specific Gadamerian insights are helpful for this matter. As for the speculative features of hermeneutics, the concept of understanding may be used, as well as Gadamer's analysis of prejudices and of the history of effect. Further, Gadamer's ecological insights anticipated some problems raised by the philosophy of the Anthropocene and are therefore also helpful in our current articulation of the concept.

Analysis of prejudices and attitudes of students in the department of physical therapy against people with disabilities.

[Purpose] The purpose of this study is to examine prejudices and attitudes of students in the department of physical therapy, in order to suggest basic data for constructing an effective program to develop a positive attitude toward people with disabilities and lower social distance from them. [Subjects and Methods] For this study, students in the department of physical therapy participate in the survey examining prejudices and attitude towards people with disabilities. [Results] First, there were statistically significant differences in the prejudice against people with disabilities among student groups divided by whether they had contact on a frequent basis currently with those who have disabilities. Second, there were statistically significant differences in the prejudice against people with disabilities among student groups divided by whether they had an experience of being harmed by people with disabilities. Third, there was a correlation among prejudices against people with disabilities with each other that is articulated in the eighth domain. Finally, as a result of regression analysis, the students’ attitudes towards people with disabilities were explained appropriately by the prejudices about performance of daily tasks and NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) syndrome. [Conclusion] It is crucial to create an environment where University students in the department of physical therapy can have positive interactions with people with disabilities, to reduce the overall prejudices, and specifically, the prejudices about performance of daily tasks and about NIMBY syndrome.

New methodological aspects the study of prejudice

The work is devoted to the problems of improving the institute prejudice. To improve the legislation on prejudice are encouraged to use the system-institutional approach to the study of legal phenomena. Analysis of prejudice through institutional and systemic approach will create a flexible system of legal regulation. The author identifies the internal and external organizational structure of the Institute of prejudice, prejudice defines media.

Toward a Thoroughly Cultural and Discursive Moral Analysis of Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism

Toward a Thoroughly Cultural and Discursive Moral Analysis of Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism

Statistical learning and prejudice

Human behavior is guided by evolutionarily shaped brain mechanisms that make statistical predictions based on limited information. Such mechanisms are important for facilitating interpersonal relationships, avoiding dangers, and seizing opportunities in social interaction. We thus suggest that it is essential for analyses of prejudice and prejudice reduction to take the predictive accuracy and adaptivity of the studied prejudices into account.

Interdisciplinarity. Qu'est-ce que les Lumières? La Reconnaissance au dix-huitième siècle by Jonathan Mallinson

MLR, 103.2,2oo8 537 of Jansenism in I698. Other aspects of Racine's life aremeticulously charted, such as his economic good sense, the devoted attachment to his family,and the degree to which highly placed noblemen valued his acquaintance. This biography is of course much more than that. In fact, itreads at times like a compendium of literarydebates and dramatic principles inwhich all aspects ofRacine's career, understood as driven by vocation rather than ambition, are fullycontextualized with detailed information on his relations with fellow playwrights, troupes, and theworld of culture gener ally.There again, Forestier nails his colours firmlyto themast and his position will not surprise those acquainted with his writings on Corneille. Racine's trajectory is described uniquely in termsof an engagement with language: tragedygenerates emo tion rather than portraying the human condition according to amodern perspective on the tragic. In that respect, Andromaque derives fromRacine's literary culture, not from any privileged knowledge of the human heart. Forestier applies the same principle to other forms ofwriting, thus suggesting that language as product forms a barrier between private experience and public consumption. IfRacine is a 'poete inquiet' (p. 77I), it is as a result of his perfectionism. One might, however, reflect that seventeenth-century expectations need not necessarily rule out other explana tions or interpretations. No writer or period can be fully aware of the implications of its production. What Forestier's position as a biographer does mean is thatwe are forbidden resolutely frommoving from the life to thework, which is seen as a pure literaryconstruction rather than a rehearsal of personal demons. That Forestier privileges vocation over ambition, which does not in itself exclude the pursuit of 'gloire', is evidenced in his view thatRacine took very seriously his position as the king's historian, precisely by applying his linguistic talents to another formofwrit ing.As a consequence, Racine's career implies a continuity of literaryendeavour and not the radical career change others have described, although, interestingly and per haps paradoxically, Phedre is regarded as 'une sorte d'aboutissement' (p. 529). Some will hesitate before accepting Forestier's absolutism in rejecting a 'tragic vision' for Racine. The view that the French Church, except at itsmargins, considered theatre with equanimity is at least debatable (Laurent Thirouin is, incidentally,not the first to describe 'Senault's paradox' whereby plays are all themore dangerous forbeing 'honnetes'). But Forestier's biography undoubtedly represents amajor achievement which, I suspect, will not be bettered forseveral generations of academic life, ifat all. UNIVERSITY OFMANCHESTER HENRY PHILLIPS Interdisciplinarity.Qu 'est-ceque lesLumieres? La Reconnaissance au dix-huitieme siecle. Ed. by JONATHAN MALLINSON. (SVEC, 2oo6: 12)Oxford: Voltaire Foundation. 2006. 400 ppP. 75. ISBN 978-o-7294-o886-8. With almost thirtyarticles by both established and young scholars, this volume pre sentsmaterial from a broad range of fields, including philosophy, art history, literary studies, and the history of ideas. Fittingly, then, itopens with Sarah Maza's subtle and persuasive intervention in the debate over interdisciplinarity in research and particularly-in teaching.While Maza reminds us that interdisciplinarity may be used as 'ameans of securing new orthodoxies and enshrining new elites' (p. I4) in the increasingly corporate culture of universities, she insists thatwe continue to discuss what may seem likean inevitable aspect of eighteenth-century studies, so as topursue distinction and to avoid conformity.Only by interrogatingwhat is at stake in inter disciplinarity rather than accepting it 'from above', she argues, may we clarify the method and purpose of itspractice. There follow over a dozen articleswhich attempt to answer 'Qu'est-ce que lesLumieres?', towhich thornyquestion the editors of this 538 Reviews section answer that theperiod ischaracterized not somuch by the triumph of reason as by a crisis of confidence in reason. The relevance of some contributions is not entirely evident, but several articles stand out for their insight and acuity; Guillaume Pigeard de Gurbert plots a course through Leibniz and Locke, Bayle and English gardens tochallenge Michel Foucault's account of theEnlightenment's sense of time; Antony McKenna examines the diffusion of clandestine philosophy following the Revocation of theEdict ofNantes, andMichael Moriarty, focusing onMalebranche's analysis ofprejudice, convincingly argues for that theologian's place in thecritical...

A Tribute to Allport: Surveying the Last 50 Years of Research on Prejudice

There is no debate that Gordon W. Allport's (1954/1979) The Nature of Prejudice is the foundational work for the social psychology of We wholeheart edly agree with this opening sentence (p. 1) of On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years After Allport, edited by John Dovidio, Peter Glick, and Laurie Rudman. Gordon Allport's seminal work did indeed guide much of the social psychological research on prejudice throughout the last 50 years. And in a fitting tribute to Allport's con tributions, this follow-up volume aims to review that substantial body of research and outline an agenda for the future of research on prejudice. On the 50th anniversary of Allport's original text, the editors of this book as sembled an impressive collection of scholars to reflect on the history of the social psychological study of prejudice, speculate on the future of the field, and contem plate Allport's contributions. The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues (SPSSI) is the official sponsor of the book, with its royalties going toward SPSSI's educational and scientific programs, a detail that we strongly applaud. Although intended to celebrate Allport's insights, this book is not a blatant dis play of adulation. Rather, the editors and authors examine his assertions through a critical-but fair-lens, applauding his hits without sugarcoating his misses. This is clearly an asset of the volume, leaving the reader with an accurate impression of the theoretical foundations laid by Allport, the areas where empirical research has failed to support his analysis, and his hypotheses that remain yet untested. The book's editors intended it to serve as a companion to Allport's text. We think the current volume would indeed benefit from being teamed with the original work because there is an implicit assumption that the reader has at least a passing familiarity with Allport's analysis of prejudice. To facilitate the pairing of these books, the editors have followed the same sequence of topics and chapters as in Allport's work, with each team of authors tackling its own specialty. This explicit substantive parallel between the original and subsequent works was certainly a wise decision. Just as the original work did, this book covers a lot of ground on the topic of prejudice, from social cognitive to motivational to sociocultural processes. Howev er, the current volume is necessarily terser than the original, because these authors aim to cover Allport's perspective, developments since that original analysis, and projected topics for future discovery. In an attempt to unify the large number of chapters, each written by a different research team, the editors chose a common expository structure to frame each chapter: a summary of Allport's analysis on the focal topic, a description of theoretical and empirical developments since Allport, a description of new conceptual frameworks for the relevant topic, an examina tion of extant support for Allport's analysis, and suggestions for fruitful future directions. We think most readers will find this consistency very helpful. However, because this volume covers so much ground in a cursory way, our general sense is that the most appropriate audience includes graduate students and beyond.

In defense of the subtle prejudice concept: a retort

AbstractWith no theory and the use of different methods and assumptions, Coenders and his colleagues not surprisingly produce a different analysis of prejudice from ours of 1995. But we see no reason to withdraw our claims for both the concept and measurement of subtle prejudice. By obscuring our theoretical structure and offering none of their own, our critics follow their empirical preferences to reach a meaningless solution. In doing so, they disregard the social psychological literature on prejudice—especially that of Rokeach and Tajfel. Moreover, their reanalysis of the 1988 Eurobarometer survey data does not replicate our analysis in important ways. We answer their objections to our use of orthogonal varimax rotation and our demonstrations of the predictive value of the Subtle Prejudice Scale, and we show that when tested appropriately our theoretically derived model performs as well as and often significantly better than their atheoretical model. We also find the six conditions set down by Coenders et al. for differentiating the two forms of prejudice are largely met by our analysis. Finally, repeated replications by other investigators in ten countries with diverse outgroups and new samples support both our original analysis and the usefulness of our Blatant and Subtle Prejudice Scales. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

(Dis)respecting versus (Dis)liking: Status and Interdependence Predict Ambivalent Stereotypes of Competence and Warmth

As Allport (1954) implied, the content of stereotypes may be systematic, and specifically, ambivalent. We hypothesize two clusters of outgroups, one perceived as incompetent but warm (resulting in paternalistic prejudice) and one perceived as competent but not warm (resulting in envious prejudice). Perceived group status predicts perceived competence, and perceived competition predicts perceived (lack of) warmth. Two preliminary surveys support these hypotheses for 17 outgroups. In‐depth analyses of prejudice toward particular outgroups support ambivalent prejudice: Paternalistic prejudice toward traditional women, as well as envious prejudice toward career women, results in ambivalent sexism (Glick & Fiske, 1996). Envious prejudice toward Asians results in perceived competence but perceived lack of social skills. Ambivalent content reflects systematic principles.

Social Distance and Assimilation Orientation: A Survey of Attitudes Towards Immigrants in New Zealand

Pacific ViewpointVolume 12, Issue 2 p. 141-162 ArticleFree Access Social Distance and Assimilation Orientation: A Survey of Attitudes Towards Immigrants in New Zealand A. D. Trlin, A. D. TrlinSearch for more papers by this author A. D. Trlin, A. D. TrlinSearch for more papers by this author First published: 01 May 1971 https://doi.org/10.1111/apv.122003Citations: 12AboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat REFERENCES 1Ames, R. G. and Sakuma, A. F., 1969, “Criteria for Evaluating Others: A Re-examination of the Bogardus Social Distance Scale”, Sociology and Social Research, 54, 5- 24. 1Borrie, W. D., 1959, The Cultural Integration of Immigrants, Unesco, Paris. 1Brookes, R. H. and Kawharu, I. H. (eds), 1967, Administration in New Zealand’s Multi-Racial Society, Wellington and London. 1Burnley, I. H., 1970, “ The Greeks”, in K. W. Thomson and A. D. Trlin (eds), 100- 124. 1 Department of Labour, 1964, “Assisted Immigration 1946-1964”, Labour and Employment Gazette, 14.3, 8- 11. 1Goode, W. J. and Hatt, P. K., 1952, Methods in Social Research, International Student Edition, New York. 1Holmes, F. W., 1966/67, “ Some Thoughts on Immigration” (3 parts), Quarterly Predictions ( New Zealand Institute of Economic Research), Sept. 1966, 18-24; Dec. 1966, 18-22; March 1967, 19- 24. 1Jackson, J. A. (ed.), 1969, Migration, Sociological Studies 2, Cambridge. 1 Labour Committee, 1969, Report of the Labour Committee to the National Development Conference, Wellington. 1Lane, P. A., 1970, “ Immigration and Economics”, in K. W. Thomson and A. D. Trlin (eds), 25- 37. 1Lochore, R. A., 1951, From Europe to New Zealand: An Account of Our Continental European Settlers, Wellington. 1McCreary, J. R., 1952, The Modification of International Attitudes: A New Zealand Study, Victoria University of Wellington, Publications in Psychology, No. 2, Wellington. 1McCreary, J. R., 1965, Housing and Welfare Needs of Islanders in Auckland: A Report to the Minister of Island Territories, Government Printer, Wellington. 1Metge, A. J., 1967, “ Alternative Policy Patterns in Multi-Racial Societies”, in R. H. Brookes and I. H. Kawharu (eds), 41- 56. 1 Monetary and Economic Council, 1966, Increased Immigration and the New Zealand Economy, Report No. 12, Wellington. 1O’Connor, P. S., 1968, “Keeping New Zealand White 1908-1920”, New Zealand Journal of History, 2, 41- 65. 1Price, C. A., 1969, “ The Study of Assimilation” in J. A. Jackson (ed.) 181- 237. 1Rosenberg, W., 1968, A Guidebook to New Zealand’s Future, Christchurch. 1Roy, T., 1966, “New Zealand’s Immigration Policy and External Affairs”, International Migration Review (New Series) 1, 33- 43. 1Roy, T., 1970, “ Immigration Policy and Legislation”, in K. W. Thomson and A. D. Trlin (eds), 15- 24. 1Siegel, S., 1956, Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences, International Student Edition, Tokyo. 1Simpson, G. E. and Yinger, J. M., 1965, Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination ( 3rd ed.), New York. 1Sinclair, I. H., 1944, Population: New Zealand’s Problem, Dunedin. 1Taft, R., 1963, “The Assimilation Orientation of Immigrants and Australians”, Human Relations, 16, 279- 293. 1Taft, R., 1966, From Stranger to Citizen: A survey of Studies of Immigrant Assimilation in Western Australia, London. 1Thomson, K. W. and Trlin, A. D. (eds), 1970, Immigrants in New Zealand, Massey University, Palmerston North. 1Triandis, H. C. and Triandis, L. M., 1960, “Race, Social Class and Nationality as Determinants of Social Distance”, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61, 110- 118. 1Trlin, A. D., 1969, “Those Strangers Our Neighbours”, Comment No. 38, 26- 32. 1Trlin, A. D., 1970, “ The Yugoslavs”, in K. W. Thomson and A. D. Trlin (eds), 65- 99. Citing Literature Volume12, Issue2May 1971Pages 141-162 ReferencesRelatedInformation

: Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination . George E. Simpson, J. Milton Yinger.

American AnthropologistVolume 61, Issue 3 p. 550-551 Free Access Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination. George E. Simpson and J. Milton Yinger. Ina C. Brown, Ina C. Brown Scarritt CollegeSearch for more papers by this author Ina C. Brown, Ina C. Brown Scarritt CollegeSearch for more papers by this author First published: June 1959 https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1959.61.3.02a00500AboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume61, Issue3June 1959Pages 550-551 RelatedInformation

Discrimination without Prejudice

Originally published in Contemporary Psychology: APA Review of Books, 1959, Vol 4(6), 186-187. Reviews the book, Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination by George Eaton Simpson and J. Milton Yinger (see record 1959-01076-000). This second edition adds almost 100 p

Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination

Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination

Review of Racial and cultural minorities: An analysis of prejudice and discrimination.

Review of Racial and cultural minorities: An analysis of prejudice and discrimination.

Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination.

I: Causes and Consequences of Prejudice and Discrimination.- 1: Types of Majority-Minority Situations.- 2: The Meaning of Race.- 3. Discrimination and Prejudice as Weapons in Group Conflict.- 4. The Individual Sources of Discrimination and Prejudice.- 5. The Cultural Factor in Prejudice and Discrimination.- 6. The Consequences of Prejudice and Discrimination: The Responses of Minority-Group Members.- 7. Types of Response to Prejudice and Discrimination.- 8. The Consequences of Prejudice and Discrimination for Prejudiced Persons and Dominant Groups.- II: Minorities in the Social Structure: The Institutional Patterns of Intergroup Relations.- 9. Minorities in the Economy of the United States.- 10. Minorities in the Economy of the United States (Continued).- 11. Racial and Cultural Minorities and the American Political and Legal Processes.- 12. Minorities and the American Political and Legal Processes (Continued).- 13. Minority Family Patterns and Intermarriage.- 14. Minority-Majority Relations and Religion.- 15. The Education of Racial and Cultural Minorities in the United States.- 16. The Education of Racial and Cultural Minorities in the United States (Continued).- III: Prejudice, Discrimination, and Democratic Values.- 17. The Reduction of Prejudice and Discrimination: Changing the Prejudiced Person.- 18. The Reduction of Prejudice and Discrimination: Strategies with Major Emphasis on Changing Situations.- Author Index.

Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination.George Eaton Simpson , J. Milton Yinger

Previous articleNext article No AccessBook ReviewsRacial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination. George Eaton Simpson , J. Milton Yinger Lewis M. KillianLewis M. Killian Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by American Journal of Sociology Volume 59, Number 3Nov., 1953 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/221353 Views: 1Total views on this site PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

George Eaton Simpson and J. Milton Yinger, Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination

George Eaton Simpson and J. Milton Yinger, <i>Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination</i>

Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination

Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination