Sex and Collective Fault Effect on Relation for Local Australians - Research Paper Example

Gender and collective guilt impact on Attitude towards indigenous Australians. Name: Institutions: Date: Word count. Abstract Different researches have been conducted on the impact collective guilt has on attitude towards indigenous Australians and the relationship gender has on the attitude towards indigenous Australians. Some researchers claim there is a relationship while others oppose the claim. This paper therefore aims at investigating the relationship which exists between attitude towards indigenous Australians and collective guilt and gender. The research was conducted on 382: 303 female and 79 being male. Test statistics was conducted to determine the relationship which existed between gender and attitude towards indigenous Australians. Pearson correlation was -0. 239.This showed negative relationship between collective guilt and attitude towards indigenous Australians. Significance test on relationship between gender and attitude towards indigenous Australians showed a t (379) =1.569, p= 0.117 therefore P>0.05 and decision rule ranging between -0.5315 and 0.47329 when variance was assumed to be equal and t (379) = 1.400, p= 0.165 hence P>0.05 and decision rule ranged between -0.08747 and 0.50761. After assuming un equal variance. Analysis of variance resulted to F (3,376) =0.203, P=0.894, P>0.05.the results therefore showed that there was no significant difference between gender and attitude towards indigenous Australians. therefore much requires being done to identify factors which impact attitude towards Indigenous Australians as they could be used effectively in enhancing reconciliation and reduce the negative perception non aboriginal have towards Aboriginal Australians. References. Balvin, N & Bretherton D. (2012). Peace Psychology in Australia. New York: Springer. Dixon, J., Durrheim, K, & Tredoux, C. (2007). Intergroup Contact and attitude towards the principle and practice of racial equality. Psychological science, 18,867-72. Gomersall, A., Davidson, G. & Ho, R. (2000). Factors Affecting Acceptance of Aboriginal Reconciliation amongst Non-Indigenous Australians. Australian Psychologist 35(2): 118-27. Goot, M. & Rowse, T.(2007). Divided Nation?: Indigenous Affairs and the Imagined Public. Melbourne: Melbourne University Publisher. Grattan, M. (2000). Essays on Australian Reconciliation. Bookman Press, Melbourne. Halloran, J. (2006). Indigenous Reconciliation in Australia: Do Values, Identity and Collective Guilt Matter? Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 17: 1-18. Hinton, J (2008). Indigenous Australians and the Law 2/e. Abingdon: Routledge- Cavendish press. McCallum, K. (2003). Walking and Talking Reconciliation: An Analysis of the Role of Local Talk as a Construction of Public Opinion on Indigenous Issues in Australia. Australian Journal of Communication, 30(2): 115-32. Paula, M. & Lisa B. (2007). Perception of reconciliation and related indigenous issues among young residents of Shepparton. Australian journal of social issues, 42(4). Pedersen, A., Griffiths, B., Contos, N., Bishop, B. & Walker, I. (2000). Attitudes toward Aboriginal Australians in City and Country Settings. Australian Psychologist, 35(2): 109-17. Pedersen, A., Beven, J., Walker, I. & Griffiths, B. (2004). Attitudes toward Indigenous Australians: The Role of Empathy and Guilt. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology .14: 233-49. Pedersen, A., Clarke, S., Dudgeon, P. & Griffiths, B. (2006). Attitudes toward Indigenous Australians and Asylum Seekers: The Role of False Beliefs and other Social-Psychological Variables. Australian Psychologist. 40(3): 170-78. Saxton, A. (2004). Whiteness and Reconciliation: A Discursive Analysis. Australian Psychologist 39(1): 14-23. Sweeney, S., Johnson, J. & Trimble, K. (1996). Unfinished Business: Australians and Reconciliation. Canberra: AGPS. Watson, V. (2000). Power and politics: Debate over Native Title. In S. Lockie & L. Bourke (eds.) Rurality Bites, the Social and Environmental Transformation of Rural Australia, Sydney: Pluto Press. Table 1. Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation reconciliation 381 2.00 5.00 4.2217 .63968 atia 380 1.00 6.50 2.9969 1.05603 Cguilt 380 1.00 7.00 4.2211 1.04241 empathy 378 3.50 7.00 5.6345 .67261 qualitycontact 373 1.25 5.00 3.6186 .73175 acquaintance 373 1.00 5.00 2.7641 1.19051 friends 366 1.00 5.00 2.1721 1.13736 Valid N (listwise) 366 Table 2. Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Std. Error Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper reconciliation Equal variances assumed 5.104 .024 -2.355 379 .019 -.19015 .08074 -.34890 -.03141 Equal variances not assumed -2.082 104.499 .040 -.19015 .09131 -.37122 -.00909 atia Equal variances assumed 5.776 .017 1.569 378 .117 .21007 .13387 -.05315 .47329 Equal variances not assumed 1.400 105.472 .165 .21007 .15007 -.08747 .50761 Table 3. ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. reconciliation Between Groups 8.807 3 2.936 7.545 .000 Within Groups 146.684 377 .389 Total 155.491 380 atia Between Groups .684 3 .228 .203 .894 Within Groups 421.974 376 1.122 Total 422.658 379 Appendix . Penedrson et al. (2004). Abstract. Previous research in Perth, Western Australia, finds a disturbing amount of prejudice against Indigenous Australians. At the forefront of much prejudice research has been the distinction between old-fashioned and modern prejudice. We constructed an Attitude Toward Indigenous Australians scale from items originating from qualitative data. We found that negative attitudes were predicted by collective guilt about past and present wrongs to Indigenous Australians (collective guilt directly linked to Indigenous issues, as well as collective guilt generally). Negative attitudes were also predicted by a lack of empathy for Indigenous Australians, and affective perspective taking generally. Socio-demographics (e.g. a lack of education) predicted negative attitudes, which indicate the necessity of taking both social-psychological and socio-demographic factors into account when examining the nature of prejudice. A number of practical implications arise from these findings Pederson et al. (2000) Abstract The reasons behind the attitudes of non-Aboriginal Australians toward Aboriginal Australians have not been examined empirically. Neither has the relationship between such attitudes and false beliefs about Aboriginal people and entitlements, and “political correctness”. Two random surveys were conducted in 1997 in a city location (Perth, Western Australia) and a country mining town (Kalgoorlie, Western Australia). Three major findings emerged. First, modern prejudice (a subtle form of prejudice with a veneer of egalitarianism) was more prevalent than old-fashioned prejudice (a blunt, segregationist form of prejudice) in both locations, although Kalgoorlie residents scored significantly higher than Perth residents on modern prejudice. Second, political correctness was predicted by prejudice, which related (directly or not) with age, education, political orientation, and false beliefs. Third, attitudes toward Aboriginal people served both a value-expressive function (to do with values and beliefs) and an experiential-schematic function (to do with personal experience). However, the latter function was more prevalent in Kalgoorlie compared to Perth. Overall, the results support previous findings regarding the declining prevalence of old-fashioned prejudice, but indicate that prejudice is still commonplace. Additionally, the findings — especially those concerning false beliefs — suggest that the public should be given more information about Aboriginal history and issues, and that other strategies be put into place to address the problem of prejudice within Australian society. Halloran 2007. Abstract This paper reports an investigation of the impact of shared values and identities on Australian attitudes towards Indigenous reconciliation across two studies. In Study 1, University students were assigned to one of two conditions in which they completed a questionnaire that measured their value priorities and reconciliation attitudes; either as an individual or as an Australian. As expected, the value of egalitarianism was the strongest predictor of reconciliation attitudes, especially under the Australian condition. In Study 2, participants from the general community were assigned into conditions that manipulated identity (personal vs. Australian) and views of how Indigenous Australians have been treated by Europeans in the past (favourable vs. unfavourable). Under these conditions, participants were asked to report their level of collective guilt and reconciliation views. The results showed that collective guilt was stronger under the unfavourable than the favourable history condition but only when personal identity was salient. The findings also showed some support for the proposition that reconciliation views would be most positive under the unfavourable history condition when Australian identity was salient. The implications of the findings for advancing the progress of indigenous reconciliation in Australia are discussed Pederson et al. 2005. Abstract Australia has a long and chequered history regarding relations between different cultural groups. Indigenous, Asian, Yugoslav, Italian and Arabic Australians have all suffered from negativity directed toward them by ‘‘mainstream’’ Australia. At the beginning of the 21st century there has been much publicity about two groups: Indigenous Australians and asylum seekers. In this paper, we examine community attitudes toward these two groups, in particular the role of false beliefs in such attitudes. We then set out both the similarities and differences in these two highly related sets of attitudes, and conclude that Australia would appear not to be as accepting of a multi-cultural society as we sometimes believe, and on which we often pride ourselves. There are many social-psychological and structural issues related to negative attitudes toward Indigenous Australians and asylum seekers; much work needs to be carried out to address these. Paula M. & Lisa, B. 2007. Abstract It has been argued that reconciliation between Indigenous and non-lndigenous Australians requires non-Indigenous Australians to change their attitudes. Some suggest that this process is occurring and that younger people hold more positive attitudes towards Indigenous Australians. This paper explored the perspectives of 86 young people from Shepparton, Victoria in relation to reconciliation and related Indigenous issues. The study found that young participants' views of reconciliation varied, and while some supported reconciliation, many opposed a national apology and indicated that they were not very informed about or interested in Aboriginal issues. Many distinguished between 'good' and 'bad' Aboriginals based on behaviour. Their talk was embedded with notions of special privilege, 'sameness' and social hierarchy but excluded attention to cultural difference. Findings suggest that these young people have embraced discourses of sameness, individualism and 'practical reconciliation' and that they are reluctant to reflect on their position of White privilege. Read More