Nature Of Prejudice Research Articles

Influence of personality, biases on financial risk tolerance among retail investors in India

Investors’ personality traits and psychological biases play a crucial role in the decision-making process and risk-taking behavior of investors. The emotional and psychological factors impact the decision-making, giving rise to biases. These biases make investors make irrational decisions, which signifies the need for this study. This study aims to assess investors’ personalities using HEXACO model and its interaction with biases and financial risk tolerance. The data of 530 retail investors in India, who had more than 2 years of investing experience in the stock market, were collected. The study considered the HEXACO model since it captures all dimensions of personality that are not considered in the commonly used Big Five Model (BFM). The result of structural equation modeling and mediation analysis shows that the ‘honesty-humility’ trait significantly affects overconfidence bias. The mediation analysis of biases between traits and financial risk tolerance showed complete, partial, and no mediation effect depending on the nature of prejudice. Clear distinction of personality traits into ‘virtue traits’ and ‘character traits’ can be observed. This clear distinction paves the way for employing the HEXACO model in future studies.

Ambivalent Encounters in Calais

ABSTRACT ‘The term encounter has been used in various disciplines to indicate a bringing together of difference (people, groups, ideas, etc.) with an aim of some form of positive or beneficial outcome’ [Standish, K., 2021. Encounter Theory. Peacebuilding, 9 (1), 1–14.]. Allport [Allport, G.W., 1954. The Nature of Prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books] suggests that contact between different groups might lead to a positive change and the reduction in stereotypes, but later research shows that often conflict is more likely to arise. Nonetheless, while contact might presuppose co-existence and thereby, the enduring presence of conflict, encounter ‘is much more than that and involves a space where being with is the outcome itself’ (Standish 2021: 40). It is my contention that the ambivalent nature of the encounters that occur in the Calaisian space generates a layered level of dislocation for those who are entering this space. By definition 'ambivalent’ implies that feelings and reactions are mixed or contradictory. It argues that the ambivalence of these encounters shape not only people of the move’s experiences but also the discourses around them, leading to constant tensions and shifting allegiances, and ultimately the maintenance of the status quo.

Трансформация предубеждения в неявные формы как индикатор его функций в межгрупповых отношениях

<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Objective. </strong>The study is aimed to clarify the understanding of the functions of prejudice in intergroup relations. A comparison of approaches to explaining intergroup relations and an analysis of the transformation of prejudice into covert, subtle forms were applied in order to achieve the aim. <br><strong>Background. </strong>The plasticity of prejudice, its transformation into covert, subtle forms in response to equal rights movements and social inadmissibility, the inconsistencies in the prejudice reduction techniques effectiveness indicates that something fundamental about the nature of prejudice is being missed by researchers. The persistent negativity of prejudice suggests that one should look for this “missing” in the concept of functions. The functions of prejudice per se have not been a focus of research attention yet. <br><strong>Methodology. </strong>The rationale was based on functional analysis in psychology, sociology and social anthropology.<br><strong>Conclusions. </strong>The persistence, “inflexibility” of a negative attitude is an essential trait of prejudice, and not just an imperfection of its first definitions. It points to the functions that prejudice fulfills in intergroup relations, that is, it leads to a positive, a useful result for the system (society and its structure). Features of the transformation of prejudice into covert forms show that preserving the entitativity and the boundaries of the group (which is the unit of this system) in a “loose” egalitarian society seems to be prejudice function.</p>

Предрассудок как предмет междисциплинарного исследования

The subject of the study is the phenomenon of prejudice, studied in various specialized discourses and con-texts – linguistic, philosophical and psychological. In this regard, the problem under study can quite reasonably be attributed to the objects of multidisciplinary research. An attempt has been made to consider and rethink the well-known term and the problems behind it in a fairly wide field of view. An additional objective of the study is to justify the need to rethink both the very nature of prejudice and the role it actually plays. In accordance with the aim of the study, a wide range of methods was used, used in specific local areas, but requiring a certain general unifying methodological link, technique or principle. This, according to the author, is the so-called sys-temic or rational eclecticism, used in various fields of humanities. Its use allowed, within certain limits, to com-bine ideas contained in relatively localized scientific fields, as well as to turn to artistic and literary genres of creativity as an illustrative background. The main conclusion of the study was the proposition that the phenom-enon of prejudice contains not only a negative emotional and affective connotation, but can also be used as an effective tool to counter undesirable phenomena in specific cognitive, psychological, sociocultural discourses and areas of behavior. The main result that can be used in solving actual specific cognitive, ideological and behavioral problems is proposed to understand the phenomenon of prejudice, where an unprejudiced attitude should be formed towards the prejudice itself, that is, this would mean actually getting rid of prejudice in the opinion regarding the prejudice itself as a phenomenon.

Precursory Prevention: Togetherness for Better Health

Precursory Prevention: Togetherness for Better Health

Antilocution and trust in the workplace: Perceptions of higher education trained police recruits in England and Wales

Abstract This study seeks to examine the relationship between antilocution and trust in the workplace by reflecting on the perceptions of police officers who are undertaking the new Higher Education (HE) pathway into the policing profession in England and Wales. This relationship is considered through Allport (1979). ‘The Nature of Prejudice. New York, NY: Perseus’ concept of antilocution and the lens of trust in the workplace, to understand how new police students think they are regarded by their policing colleagues and its impact on practice. Utilizing a survey of police students from five different forces in England and Wales, indicative results suggest that, whilst broadly supportive of new police officers, there may be some division regarding their education and training pathway through higher education, engendering levels of prejudice and bias towards the new recruits. Police student responses indicate that many of them feel that more is expected of them and that they are under closer supervision because they have undertaken the Higher Education route. Arguably, this prejudice and bias have an adverse effect on trust within the workplace, a concept which is front and centre of policing which ultimately can have a negative impact on public safety and security. The results of this study indicate that the interaction between new recruits (out-group) and established colleagues (in-group) is complex and not straightforward, and suggested implications for police practice are presented.

Prejudice in Testimonial Justification: A Hinge Account

AbstractAlthough research on epistemic injustice has focused on the effects of prejudice in epistemic exchanges, the account of prejudice that emerges in Fricker's (2007) view is not completely clear. In particular, I claim that the epistemic role of prejudice in the structure of testimonial justification is still in need of a satisfactory explanation. What special epistemic power does prejudice exercise that prevents the speaker's words from constituting evidence for the hearer's belief? By clarifying this point, it will be possible to address two more general issues concerning the nature of prejudice: its resistance to counterevidence and the steps involved in overcoming prejudice. I propose a hinge account of prejudice, based on the recent perspective of hinge epistemology, to help clarify these aspects. According to the hinge account, prejudices share a fundamental feature with hinges: they work as norms of evidential significance, and as such, they determine what can and cannot count as evidence for belief.

‘I don't feel insulted’: Constructions of prejudice and identity performance among Roma in Bulgaria

AbstractDrawing on studies showing that arguments about the nature of intergroup prejudice allow members of privileged groups to ‘perform’ a positive social identity, the present study explores how arguments about the nature of prejudice are produced by targets of prejudice in order to consolidate or challenge their own social identity. We conducted interviews with Bulgarian Roma and, based on a discursive psychology approach, analysed the way participants contested being assigned to a Roma‐exclusive identity category, which they treated as produced by prejudiced beliefs of the non‐Roma high‐status majority population. Positive intergroup contact was used to demonstrate the absence of prejudice and counter Roma identity threat. Auto‐stereotyping and disidentification, in turn, revealed how one's own situation is distinguished from the group. We discuss how identity performances founded on prejudice constructions work to maintain or challenge intergroup boundaries. We conclude that studies revealing prejudice constructions of minority groups can explain the sedative effect of positive intergroup contact on ethnic activism and help to reflect on integration strategies that would be compatible with social change in favour of disadvantaged minority groups.

Advancing intergroup contact theory: Comments on the issue's articles

AbstractConcerns about intergroup contact have a long and somewhat tortuous history. Shaped largely by Social Darwinism dogma, early theorizing anticipated negative effects. Following World War II, however, a more optimistic view took hold, and social psychological research began to study the phenomenon. Allport's (1954) influential book, the Nature of Prejudice, focused social psychological attention on intergroup contact and shaped research on it for the rest of the 20th century. Now the domain has developed into a complex and intricate theory, complete with multiple forms of contact and numerous moderating and mediating variables—as demonstrated in the articles throughout this JSI issue. Within this historical context of the theory's development, this article then comments on each of the previous articles and their further advances to the theory.

Prejudice and Discrimination Toward Immigrants.

Prejudice and discrimination toward immigrants, and the consequences of these negative attitudes and behavior, are key determinants of the economic, sociocultural, and civic-political future of receiving societies and of the individuals who seek to make these societies their new home. In this article I review and organize the existing literature on the determinants and nature of prejudice and discrimination toward immigrants, summarizing what we know to date and the challenges in attributing effects to immigrant status per se. I also discuss the consequences of discrimination against immigrants for immigrants themselves, their families, and the societies in which they settle. I conclude by presenting key research questions and topics in this domain that should be at the top of the research agenda for those interested in intergroup relations in this age of mass migration.

Introduction

Introduction

Toleration and prejudice-reduction: Two ways of improving intergroup relations.

While a large body of social psychological research has shed light on the nature of prejudice and how to reduce it, we argue that such work does not address situations of cultural or religious outgroup beliefs and practices that are considered incompatible with one's own. The present theoretical article contrasts a prejudice‐reduction approach with a toleration‐based approach to consider the differences each have with regard to the attitude object they focus upon, the perceived reasonableness of the attitude, and the behavioral consequences each may lead to. In doing so, we consider the psychological processes involved in whether the negative attitude leads to negative actions. We conclude by arguing that a toleration‐based approach forms an important addition to the psychological thinking about cultural diversity and intergroup relations. Collectively, the present work makes a novel contribution to the social psychological literature by stimulating theory development and raising novel questions for empirical research.

Nature of Prejudice and Discrimination of People Without Disabilities Towards People with Different Disabilities in Addis Ababa City, Ethiopia

People with disabilities are prevented from accessing health care, and other services, going to school or learning skills, engaging in work or employment, and participating in family and community life due to the inaccessible environment, as well as traditional beliefs, prejudice and discrimination. The main aim of this study was to examine the nature and difference of prejudice and discrimination towards various types of people with disability by preparatory school (grade 11th and 12th) students. The research method used was survey. Two hundred and ninety-three students without disability, who were drawn using multi stage cluster sampling technique, participated in the study. Data were collected using Feeling & Thinking towards People with Disability Scale and Behavior towards People with Disability Scale. The instruments were administered individually. Descriptive statistics, t-test, one way analysis of variance & repeated measurement of analysis of variance were the specific statistical procedures employed to analyze data. As a major outcome of the study; the nature of prejudice towards all four groups of people with disability layed under the range of medium magnitude. Nature of discrimination towards people with physical and intellectual disability falls under the range of moderate. However, discrimination nature was mild towards people with hearing and visual disability. Therefore, nature of prejudice and discrimination vary between different types of people with disability. Consequently based on the findings of the study recommendation were forwarded.

Can Ethical Ideologies Predict Prejudice?

Idealism and relativism were designed to assess different ethical ideological views. Their relation with attitudes toward a variety of outgroups has not been previously studied. Understanding how concerns over ethical principles and consequences are related to prejudiced attitudes could provide some insight into these constructs and into the nature of prejudice. In two studies totaling 311 participants, participants completed measures on ethical ideologies, right-wing authoritarianism, and attitudes toward various outgroups. The differential predictive validities of ethical ideologies, in comparison to right-wing authoritarianism, on prejudicial attitudes toward dangerous, derogated, and dissident outgroup members were examined. We found that both idealism and relativism contributed to predicting attitudes regarding outgroup members, over and above right-wing authoritarianism. As such, people’s personal moral standards and code of conduct for dealing with interpersonal problems and transgressions can partly explain their negative attitudes toward outgroup members. More research is required to determine the unique influence of ethical ideologies over other constructs previously shown to predict prejudice.

<em>CoBRAS as a Predictor of Attitudes toward Redistributing Resources to Improve Predominantly Black Schools</em>

INTRODUCTIONThe essence of racial prejudice has not changed with time. It is the same today as it was in the 1980s and 1990s when Schuman and colleagues were composing Racial Attitudes in America (Schuman et al., 1997), and it is the same as it was in the 1950s when Gordon Allport (1954) was writing his seminal work, The Nature of Prejudice. Consequently, when survey research data tell one that prejudice is on the decline, it is tempting to feel a sense of optimism about the trajectory of race relations in this country. Unfortunately, the numbers can be a bit misleading (Hutchings, 2009; Neville et al., 2013). While the essence of prejudice has remained immutable over the years, the expression of it has evolved considerably (Bobo et al., 2009). Americans today are far less willing to admit to being prejudiced, even when their stated opinions clearly belie their race-neutral personas (Bonilla-Silva, 2003).Researchers have had to adapt to these changes in order to document how much prejudice still exists and how it influences people's thinking about race-conscious political issues. This can be tricky, but it is important because there are real consequences associated with prejudice, even when it is subtle and outwardly denied. Oftentimes, explicit measures do not fully appreciate this reality and underestimate the extent to which prejudice factors into policy attitudes. This leaves one with a far rosier picture of modern society than what is actually experienced on a day-to-day basis (Bonilla-Silva, 2001; Mercer et al., 2011, Sue, 2013).Of the myriad theories that have been proposed to describe contemporary expressions of prejudice, racial ideology theory (Bonilla-Silva, 1997) has emerged as one of the most promising. It alleges that people are motivated to protect the interests of the dominant racial group by advancing prejudicial views, but to do so in a manner that is perceived by others as non-offensive and nonaggressive (Bonilla-Silva, Lewis, & Embrick, 2004; Gushue & Constantine, 2007). A common strategy is to deny that there are genetic differences between the races (I never said Whites are born smarter) while unashamedly embracing culture-blaming explanations for social stratification (I just said that Black people don't work as hard because they know they'll get handouts anyway). People are able to engage in this type of double-speak because cultural norms governing the expression of prejudice do not sanction people who state that Whites are more moral or have an impeccable work ethic in the same way that they sanction people who scream racial epithets. In fact, most listeners are willing to dismiss cultural explanations that favor Whites as little more than stating the obvious, especially when the speaker insists that racism is no longer a problem in today's society (Bonilla-Silva, 2012).Researchers have become increasingly aware of the role color-blindness plays in reasoning about race in therapeutic relationships, and they have begun conducting empirical research to bolster their theories. The most popular instrument for quantifying the trait is the use of the Color-Blind Racism Attitudes Scale (CoBRAS; Neville et al., 2000). Over a decade's worth of research has indicated that CoBRAS has solid psychometric properties, and the data it has produced have helped counselor educators to improve their trainees' cultural competencies (Neville et al., 2013; Neville, Spanierman, & Doan, 2006; Neville, Worthington, & Spanierman, 2001).Other research has explored the role of color-blindness in reasoning about political issues (Bonilla-Silva & Dietrich, 2011). For example, Oh and colleagues (2010) found CoBRAS to be a better predictor of affirmative action beliefs than race or group-interest. Similarly, Awad, Cokley, and Ravitch (2005) reported that CoBRAS scores were predictive of attitudes toward affirmative action, even after accounting for modern racism.PURPOSEThis study builds on previous research to demonstrate how CoBRAS can be used to advance educational and sociological inquiry. …

Contact theory and the concept of prejudice: Metaphysical and moral explorations and an epistemological question

Gordon Allport’s Contact Hypothesis has been greatly advanced over the decades into what is now called Contact Theory. The application of the theory toward the improvement of intergroup relations has had the effect of concealing the fact that Contact Theory is fundamentally a prejudice theory and not a theory of intergroup relations. This article focuses on the concept of prejudice by following the ways in which Allport worked with the concept prior to and after the publication of The Nature of Prejudice. The focus is not on the definitional correctives of prejudice that have been offered but on the metaphysical and moral perspectives that Allport adopts in his conception of prejudice. The exploration of these issues reveals a number of challenges and implications for Contact Theory that contact researchers have yet to contend with. The paper also poses an epistemological question to the theory asking: how was prejudice selected as the source of intergroup strife? Taken together the paper calls for a re-examination of the place and role of prejudice in Contact Theory and in turn a re-evaluation of the theory itself.

The impact of international experience on cultural intelligence: an application of contact theory in a structured short-term programme

The objective of this study is to examine the impact of a short-term international experience, which is designed to address the conditions outlined in Allport’s (Allport, G.W. 1954. The Nature of Prejudice. New York: Perseus Book Group) contact hypothesis, on each of the four factors which make up cultural intelligence (CQ). A sample of 135 university students was broken up into test and control groups. The results for the test group suggest that the short-term experience ranging from 7 to 12 days within a structured study abroad service programme, including modest pre-trip preparation, found a significant increase in each of the four factors of CQ. At the same time, there was no significant change in the control group. Implications for human research development research and practice as well as limitations and suggested areas for future research are discussed.

Social Psychology in Classic Counterinsurgency Writing

Social Psychology in Classic Counterinsurgency Writing

Level and change of group-focused enmity in Germany: unconditional and conditional latent growth curve models with four panel waves

In this study, we investigate and explain the level and change of six elements of group-focused enmity (GFE; see Zick et al. in J. Soc. Issues 64(2):363–383, 2008) in Germany between 2002 and 2006: racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, homophobia, exclusion of homeless people and support for rights of the established. For the data analysis, a representative 4-year panel study of the adult non-immigrant German population collected during the years 2002–2006 is used, and the development of each GFE component is tested by using an unconditional second-order latent growth curve model (LGM) (with full information maximum likelihood, FIML). We find that the level of 5 of the 6 components (racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, homophobia, exclusion of homeless people) displays an increase at the beginning of the observed period followed by a decrease. However, the sixth aspect, rights of the established, displays a continuous linear increase over time. The different developmental pattern stands in contrast to Allport’s (The nature of prejudice. Perseus Books, Cambridge, 1954) hypothesis for the strong link between the components and their development over time. We try to explain this different developmental pattern by several sociodemographic characteristics. This is performed by using a conditional second-order latent growth curve model.

Not That There’s Anything Wrong with That: The Effect of Personalized Appeals on Marriage Equality Campaigns

An increasingly predominant strategy used by organizations seeking to increase support for gay marriage is to personalize the issue by focusing on individuals in the LGBT community. However, competing theoretical traditions (e.g., Allport’s contact theory, group threat, implicit bias) raise questions about whether this strategy has the desired effect. This paper presents results from an original field experiment conducted in coordination with a marriage equality organization. Callers who self-identified as a member of the LGBT community were less effective in soliciting donations compared to callers who did not self-identify, suggesting that personalization has a negative effect on persuasion efforts. The findings cut against the grain of the Allport (The nature of prejudice, 1954) hypothesis and have important implications for social advocacy organizations in terms of rhetorical and message strategy.